The issue with savannah at this point is that they only allow one repository per user. This is quite different from git hub which allows as many repositories as a user wants or needs. This is the only problem really facing us. The git repo at github contains a full history of GNUstep from start to finish. Though some information is lost it is a very complete copy.
GC On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 8:37 AM Ivan Vučica <i...@vucica.net> wrote: > Nice web UIs make tracking changes easy and perhaps even enjoyable. Git > ecosystem has a couple of web services that let you do that. > > Git would also make it easier to do code review for new developers before > they make changes directly in the tree. > > Despite some annoying UI decisions, I'm in favor of going the Git way, > leaving the Subversion tree around but read only, of course. (I doubt that > conversion to Git is completely lossless, especially if we get multiple > repositories out of one.) > > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Fred Kiefer <fredkie...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi Greg, >> >> I don't see the big benefit in switching to git, but I wont resist that >> move either. We don't have that many branches of GNUstep, so cherry picking >> changes wont happen that often. We should make sure that the people using >> the only official branch, testplant, are willing to move too. Otherwise >> there would be really no point to it. >> >> Cheers, >> Fred >> >> On the road >> >> Am 25.05.2015 um 09:09 schrieb Gregory Casamento < >> greg.casame...@gmail.com>: >> >> > Hey guys, >> > >> > I wanted to run this past the community to see what the general feeling >> is. I am considering a move back to savannah utilizing git instead of >> subversion. >> > >> > The implementation of git on savannah, I believe, allows checkout and >> check-in VIA subversion. I would at least like to try to maintain a mirror >> there (like the one on github) so that everything can be accessed in one >> place and those who want to use git can do so. >> > >> > The reasons I have for thinking about using git are: >> > >> > 1) the branching and cherrypicking capabilities. I think it's well >> known that git's capabilities in this area far outstrip those of SVN >> hands-down. I don't think there's any debate on this issue. >> > >> > 2) community. Rightly or wrongly a large community of developers prefer >> git over any other SCMS. While I understand that certain people in our >> community don't like git for religious reasons, I also think it's time to >> reconsider religious arguments for technical decisions. >> > >> > 3) Actively developed. GIT is under active development. There have >> been few releases of SVN over the last few years. One might attribute this >> to stability, but there haven't been that many advancements in SVN in a >> while. >> > >> > 4) Tools. There are a wider range of tools on Linux, Windows and Mac >> to deal with git repositories these days. Additionally there are tools >> which can be used to make code reviews much easier. >> > >> > I would like to reach some sort of consensus on this rather than a >> flame war. I would ask that only active committers comment on this email >> thread so that we can be clear about the reasons for or against this move. >> I have stated the reasons I have above. >> > >> > Please let me know what you think. >> > >> > GC >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Discuss-gnustep mailing list >> > discuss-gnus...@gnu.org >> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gnustep-dev mailing list >> Gnustep-dev@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > discuss-gnus...@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep >
_______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
