Don't know about the tooling of git not in eclipse i am monitoring it a bit, but as long as that is not the same as SVN (or better cvs) i will not use it.
That sf.net outage is already there since pretty much day 1.. Then it works then it doesnt. very weird. For example wicket-security-1.4 did work fine on 16 of april.... On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 21:13, Martijn Dashorst <[email protected]>wrote: > Unless you haven't read the lists last couple of weeks, there have > been numerous problems letting our build server connect to sf.net's > servers. In the past the service of sf.net was abysmal (but we haven't > used their stuff for a while, so it may have improved). > > Moving to greener pastures most certainly is related to these > problems: we don't have the time to manage the server properly. We > don't have the time to ensure timely upgrades of the software, we > don't have the time to investigate what is messing up our buildserver > (is it teamcity, sf.net, our polling schedule?). > > Moving to github may not solve these problems or introduce new ones, > but it provides some really nice infrastructure, together with the > best SCM currently available (Hg could also classify as best, I hear). > > Github solves: wiki, site, tracker, scm (post commit hooks!). No more > confluence/jira to maintain... now that would be a boon! > > Martijn > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Pointbreak > <[email protected] <pointbreak%[email protected]>> wrote: > > I would think that an eventual move to github is unrelated to any of the > > maintenance problems you describe. Therefore I would say keep it is > > simple as possible and stay with sourceforge when executing the proposed > > tags. As moving to a github (and a distributed VCS) will introduce its > > own problems, paradigm shifts, tool incompatibilities and general > > misunderstandings. Whether or not such a move would be beneficial or not > > should be a separate discussion, that is unrelated to the problems you > > are trying to solve in your proposal. > > > > [X] stay with sf.net > > [ ] move to github > > > > > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:31 +0200, "Martijn Dashorst" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Currently we have a maintenance nightmare. Keeping up confluence, > >> jira, teamcity and the maven repo is cumbersome at best. We keep > >> running out of diskspace (/var has reached -300M disk free, yes minus > >> 300M). > >> > >> So I propose the following: > >> - use Apache's build grid for Wicket code, Apache repository for > >> staging and snapshot releases: separating the Apache Wicket projects > >> from Wicket Stuff projects > >> - no more custom, self hosted products a la confluence and jira (no > >> matter how much we like them) > >> - use wicketstuff.org only for running examples and a build server > >> for wicket stuff projects > >> - use sonatype's OSS repo hosting for our snapshots, release staging > >> and releases (no more wicketstuff.org/repository/maven) > >> > >> Most importantly: > >> - vote on the future of the hosting of Wicket Stuff: > >> [ ] stay with sf.net > >> [ ] move to github > >> - if we stay on sf.net: use the sf.net provided tools to manage the > >> project: issues, wiki and website > >> - if we stay to move to github: use github's provided tools to manage > >> the project: issues, wiki and website > >> > >> Martijn > >> > > > > > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.4 >
