Thanks for your opinions, everyone. Looks like most people are for the change and no one is against it. Let me start a vote for this.
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Tsuyoshi OZAWA <ozawa.tsuyo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for supplementation, Andrew. Yes, we should go step by step > and let's discuss review workflows on a another thread. > > Thanks, > - Tsuyoshi > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > I think we should take things one step at a time. Switching to git > > definitely opens up the possibility for better review workflows, but we > can > > discuss that on a different thread. > > > > A few different people have also mentioned Gerrit, so that'd be in the > > running along with Github (and I guess ReviewBoard). > > > > Thanks, > > Andrew > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Tsuyoshi OZAWA <ozawa.tsuyo...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> Thank you for great suggestion, Karthik. +1(non-binding) to use git. > >> I'm also using private git repository. > >> Additionally, I have one question. Will we accept github-based > >> development like Apache Spark? IHMO, it allow us to leverage Hadoop > >> development, because the cost of sending pull request is very low and > >> its review board is great. One concern is that the development > >> workflow can change and it can confuse us. What do you think? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> - Tsuyoshi > >> > >> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Karthik Kambatla <ka...@cloudera.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Hi folks, > >> > > >> > From what I hear, a lot of devs use the git mirror for > >> development/reviews > >> > and use subversion primarily for checking code in. I was wondering if > it > >> > would make more sense just to move to git. In addition to subjective > >> liking > >> > of git, I see the following advantages in our workflow: > >> > > >> > 1. Feature branches - it becomes easier to work on them and keep > >> > rebasing against the latest trunk. > >> > 2. Cherry-picks between branches automatically ensures the exact > same > >> > commit message and tracks the lineage as well. > >> > 3. When cutting new branches and/or updating maven versions etc., > it > >> > allows doing all the work locally before pushing it to the main > >> branch. > >> > 4. Opens us up to potentially using other code-review tools. > (Gerrit?) > >> > 5. It is just more convenient. > >> > > >> > I am sure this was brought up before in different capacities. I > believe > >> the > >> > support for git in ASF is healthy now and several downstream projects > >> have > >> > moved. Again, from what I hear, ASF INFRA folks make the migration > >> process > >> > fairly easy. > >> > > >> > What do you all think? > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > Karthik > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> - Tsuyoshi > >> > > > > -- > - Tsuyoshi >
