On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Mark Keisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just so I understand: I clone the vendor git repo. I make my customizations
> and commit to my local git repo. I can merge changes since my last pull
> from the vendor into my local repo. Am I following?
Yup.
>
> So is it easy to see which code is mine? In svn with the vendor branch, it
> is very easy since /vendor is 3rd party and /trunk is 3rd party + mine. I
> live in a corp world, so I need to be able to easily show what is OSS and
> what is internal.
Sure. You modify the workflow you mentioned above slightly:
* clone the vendor git repository
* create a new branch for the merged code, optionally setting it up to
track the vendor master branch
* commit to your new branch (or merge to the new branch from feature
branches you create for short lived development)
* when you "git pull" the vendor master branch will be updatd
* you can then merge manually
So you'll have a master branch that just has the vendor code and one
or more with vendor + your code.
Nathan
>
> Nathan Yergler wrote:
>
> One big advantage is local commits. This means you can customize your
> local configuration/software, commit the changes (giving you all the
> advantages that version control offers) and then sanely pull in
> changes from the upstream laconi.ca development. The SVN way to do
> this would be to run your own repository, use a vendor branch, etc,
> etc. It's certainly doable, but git (or bzr or hg) makes it sane.
>
> At CC we use this sort of system with MediaWiki deployments -- we
> mirror their source control in git and then create a customized
> "skeleton" with all of the extensions, configuration, etc versioned.
> We can then pull from that skeleton to create a wiki, so upgrading
> software is as easy as just editing the skeleton and the "git pull"
> ("svn up") everywhere.
>
> Nathan
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Mark Keisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
> This is besides the point it seems, but since I seem to be part of a
> dying breed... :)
> What does git really give me over svn? My impressions are that a
> decentralized model like that would make things a bit too chaotic unless
> you centralize it in which case you are back to the svn model. Not
> trying to be religious, just want to hear it from those in the trenches,
> so to speak :).
>
> Evan Prodromou wrote:
>
>
> So, would anyone mind if we changed the version control system from
> darcs to git?
>
> I think using darcs is throwing a whole bunch of people off. I'm not
> willing to switch to a centralized system like CVS or SVN -- I think
> they're a dying breed -- but I would probably be OK with using git.
>
> And git is definitely taking over the distributed version control area.
>
> Feelings, ideas, emotions, opinions?
>
> -Evan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laconica-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Keisler
> Principal Software Engineer
> Motorola Open Source Technologies
> 630-329-2828
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laconica-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laconica-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
>
>
> --
> Mark Keisler
> Principal Software Engineer
> Motorola Open Source Technologies
> 630-329-2828
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laconica-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
Laconica-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
