I like git more than svn. I have no objection to migrate. They are both very nice to work with. Svn served great till now, and I still I have no complain. Dominique, I liked your idea: "we can purge all of them at the exception of 1 or 2 examples to show the file hierarchy". Or we can purge all of them and use overlay masks for the experimental stuff.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Dominique Michel < [email protected]> wrote: > Le Mon, 29 Jul 2013 18:38:20 +0200, > Dominique Michel <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > Le Sun, 28 Jul 2013 22:06:14 +0200, > > Karl Lindén <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > Hi all! > > > > > > Some time ago there was some discussion about whether the proaudio > > > overlay should migrate to git. Would it make sense to do such a > > > migration or would it be too much work for now? > > > > > > What are the arguments that support such a change? Furthermore, what > > > are the arguments against? > > > > > > One supportive argument is that pull requests or equivalent are > > > pretty nifty. On the contrary, SVN is (in my opinion) pretty nice > > > to work with, but that is not a strictly technical argument. > > > > I use both svn and git, and for a so simple project, the only > > "advantage" I can see with git is it is never. Which is not a > > technical argument either. We can now argue about the never, the > > better. > > > > And well, I use a test overlay for my personal ebuilds and to work on > > the pro-audio ebuilds. If I have 2 ebuilds with the same name, emerge > > will use the one in my test overlay, and I see no simpler way to do > > the same with a private git branch. > > > > Also, my test overlay include things that have nothing to do with the > > pro-audio overlay, so it is no point for me to include it in some > > private git branch. > > > > So well, I have no use for git with pro-audio, and I am just fine with > > svn. > > But if someone can show he/she have an use case for a git repository in > the context of the overlay, I will have no objection to migrate. > > > > > Also, the proaudio-dev branch can be used to put experimental or > > broken ebuilds, so that every body can look at them. For now, it is > > old stuffs in it, a real mess with no ChangeLog associated with the > > ebuilds, but nobody stop anyone to use it. It would be best to put > > ChangeLog files with new ebuilds here, with comments to explain what > > the issue is. > > > > Know someone what the ebuilds in proaudio-dev are? and if yes, can > > ChangeLog files be added. If not, we can purge all of them at the > > exception of 1 or 2 examples to show the file hierarchy. Or purge all > > of them and add a README. > > > > Dominique > > > > > > > > Thanks for your thoughts! > > > > > > Regards, > > > Karl > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > "We have the heroes we deserve." > > > -- Anyway it's all the same at the end...
