Hi Piero, Please see comments in-line.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Piero Sartini <[email protected]> wrote: >> So here's a question ... what's preventing us from moving the Tapestry >> code base to GitHub? > > Did you take a look at Mercurial? Personally I would prefer it over git, but > that's a matter of taste. I am no committer or contributor so my preference is > not really important for tapestry development. There has already been a small push on the infra-dev list for a move to git and the ASF has a large number of projects being synched with a mirror at GitHub [1]. So, from a purely political standpoint, sticking with git would be the way to go. Scott Chacon wrote a git plugin for mercurial [2] that would let you interact with a git repository from within mercurial, too. So, using git as the canonical representation should make the most sense for both git and mercurial fans alike. > > One point against git may be bad windows compatibility - but I am not sure if > this is still true. I don't think this is the case any longer. I'm pretty sure there's a Windows client that doesn't require cygwin. Additionally, there has been a lot of progress on a TortoiseGit [3]. [1] - http://github.com/apache [2] - http://hg-git.github.com/ [3] - http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/ -- Kevin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
