Milos, with all respect: Unless Nigel is an employee of or paid by
Microsoft, IBM, or whoever might have a professional interest in the
decline of NetBeans, I do think that's a valid expression of an
opinion.
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Milos Kleint wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:34 PM
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Nigel Magnay wrote:
> > My vote does not really count here, but Sun aggressively
> supports
> > Mercurial in NetBeans. Based on reviews, Mercurial seemed to initially
> have
> > a technical edge whereas GIT had a loyal following. They do compete
> > aggressively
> My vote does not really count here, but Sun aggressively supports
> Mercurial in NetBeans. Based on reviews, Mercurial seemed to initially have
> a technical edge whereas GIT had a loyal following. They do compete
> aggressively and GIT has fixed many of its issues.
>
> NetBeans works better wi
in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23301063.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr
ntony Stubbs
Reply-to: "Maven Developers List"
To: dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
multiple branches in 1 repo (in hg
last time i looked you have to create a new copy to checkout a d
> Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
>
> Mercurial support for Project Hosting on Google Code
> http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/mercurial-support-for-project-hosting.html
>
> Analysis of Git and Mercurial
> http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
>
2009/4/27 Rémy Sanlaville
> Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
>
well, they didn't exactly choose one over the other - they decided to
implement Mercurial support first because it fitted better (at the time)
with GoogleCode hosting - I wouldn't be surprised to see Git supp
Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
Mercurial support for Project Hosting on Google Code
http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/mercurial-support-for-project-hosting.html
Analysis of Git and Mercurial
http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
Rémy
The gitexe has already the full maven-sm-test TCK suite implemented. So all the
things like a prepackaged git repo for the TCK is already there.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Brian Fox schrieb am Sa, 25.4.2009:
> Von: Brian Fox
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.
If you like me to help then simply ping me, I'd be honoured to help.
I didn't dive into the testing structure in place there, but if it
doesn't exist already, some external ITs would be awesome. Something we
could run against the multiple implementations to guarantee compatibility.
---
d the need) to start to
implement the jgit part.
But it should be really easy to add it.
If you like me to help then simply ping me, I'd be honoured to help.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Brian Fox schrieb am Sa, 25.4.2009:
> Von: Brian Fox
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repo
a separate directory.
-
___
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list a
y a clean checkout into a separate directory.
> >
>
>
> -
> ___
>
> http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-a
all rubbish from
.gitignore left in your working directory. And this may affect the build ...
LieGrue,
strub
--- Antony Stubbs schrieb am Sa, 25.4.2009:
> Von: Antony Stubbs
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> Datum: Samsta
n context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache
; Jason van Zyl
>>> Founder, Apache Maven
>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>> --
>>>
>>> In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
>>> and technical order to justify his
ail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Arnaud
>
>
-
___
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this messa
On 24-Apr-09, at 11:17 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Correct. The model that Android uses I would say is optimal for an
open source project. People can take real copies and derive all the
benefit from that, but they push to a gatekeeper where submissions
are
vetted. Gerrit represents som
> If developers here were truly interested they would ask and I'm
always > happy to answer specific questions.
I'd just like to point out one thing: it's not necessarily lack of
interest that can keep developers out of the picture, but also an
inability to keep up. Too much project velocity c
Yes I agree. Only the canonical code can be used to produce official
maven builds and those tags are pushed back to the master. No different
really than what happens today.
On 4/24/2009 4:53 PM, John Casey wrote:
There is one very important issue with dscm:
To be in line with our goals for Ma
There is one very important issue with dscm:
To be in line with our goals for Maven in general - especially
reproducibility - the tag created from a release MUST be available for
others to grab and rebuild from. This means that a git push is
absolutely necessary to finish off the release proce
ectory?
isn't the scm tag supposed to give you the relative path to the pom's
parent folder?
could we not just parse the scm URL to get the git root relative path
to the pom
LieGrue,
strub
--- Brian Fox schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
Von: Brian Fox
Betreff: Re: U
not a technical one. Gerrit may
also check for a 'ASL2 license granted' flag like it's solved in
issues.apache.org for patches.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Robert Burrell Donkin schrieb am Fr,
24.4.2009:
> Von: Robert Burrell Donkin
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical reposito
On 4/24/09, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 24-Apr-09, at 7:55 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl
>> wrote:
>>> On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>>
>
> Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't
>
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:55 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl
wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't
really
match
the way git works, so maybe we can change the w
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't really
>>> match
>>> the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release plugin
>>> works
>>> instead of
I have been starting to play with git for the jetty @ eclipse source
base, still backed by svn but just to get a feel for how it
works...and its pretty neat.
that said, I would say that maven3 is the prime mvn target to iron out
the mvn issues with release plugins and all the other core toolchain
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't
really match
the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release
plugin works
instead of trying to fit git into our model. Do we really need to
do a
clean checko
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Paul Gier wrote:
> Mark Struberg wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even let the maven-scm as
>> it is.
>> The problematic usecase is if we have a multi-module build and like to
>> release only one of the sub modules.
>>
>> John
On 24-Apr-09, at 10:20 , Paul Gier wrote:
Mark Struberg wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't really
match the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release
plugin works instead of trying to fit git into our model. Do we
really need to do a clea
treff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: "Maven Developers List"
> Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 16:20
> Mark Struberg wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even
> let the maven-scm as it is.
&
Mark Struberg wrote:
Hi!
I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even let the maven-scm as it is.
The problematic usecase is if we have a multi-module build and like to release
only one of the sub modules.
John Casey prepared an example for this use case:
$> git-clone http://www.co
On 24-Apr-09, at 4:24 AM, Raphaël Piéroni wrote:
Hi folks,
Thinking of distributed SCM, why choosing GIT over Mercurial or over
Bazaar
?
For one of the biggest reasons is that there is an extremely good
implementation in Java. The other proof point is that this is
successfully being
he right project directory?
LieGrue,
strub
--- Brian Fox schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
> Von: Brian Fox
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 1:21
>
>
> Mark Struberg wrote:
> > tec
We have already a long thread with lot of things so I won't repeat some
questions.
I'm +0 to move to GIT but -1 to go outside of the Apache infrastucture.
Emmanuel
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there
Hi folks,
Thinking of distributed SCM, why choosing GIT over Mercurial or over Bazaar
?
They use GIT: http://git-scm.com/ (linux kernel)
They use Mercurial:
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ProjectsUsingMercurial(openJDK)
They use Bazaar: http://bazaar-vcs.org/WhoUsesBzr (MySQL)
N
Here is a more complete summary of why I think GIT, and more
specifically JGIT is the best thing going for the SCM:
http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/04/git-the-sweetest-scm-around/
On 23-Apr-09, at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and t
; 2009/4/24 Mark Struberg
>
> >
> > answers inside
> >
> > --- Daniel Kulp schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
> >
> > > Von: Daniel Kulp
> > > Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> > > An: dev@maven.apache.org
> > >
Struberg
>
> answers inside
>
> --- Daniel Kulp schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
>
> > Von: Daniel Kulp
> > Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> > An: dev@maven.apache.org
> > CC: "Mark Struberg"
> > Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009
answers inside
--- Daniel Kulp schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
> Von: Daniel Kulp
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> CC: "Mark Struberg"
> Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 2:51
> On Thu April 23 2009 5:46
2009/4/24 Brian Fox
>
>
> Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other. This
>> hierarchy is an orga one.
>> If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
>> master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet al
On 23-Apr-09, at 7:50 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl
wrote:
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there
was a
great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved
to be a
decent system and now lots of projects
On 23-Apr-09, at 6:17 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale
switch today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
> great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to be a
> decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
>
> I'm not particularly intereste
On 23-Apr-09, at 5:33 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care
one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside
of the ASF
unless it would get the "blessing" from infrastructure a
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale switch
today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT but I do believe
that I have a better chance of
2) On a more serious note: this is EXACTLY the issue. Jason is no more
special than I am or anyone else on the Maven PMC. That is why there is a
centralized storage for the repo. Anyone on the PMC (actually, any
committer) MUST have access to entire repo for the project and be able to do
rrell Donkin schrieb am Do,
23.4.2009:
> > Von: Robert Burrell Donkin
> > Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> > An: "Maven Developers List"
> > Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 23:27
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark
> &
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside of the ASF
unless it would get the "blessing" from infrastructure and/or the board. If
you want to invest some time/
I have two concerns:
1. Is GIT firewall friendly? At work I could never get to the CVS
repository because my employer's firewall pretty much only allows http
traffic. GIT would need to support that.
2. Is this OK with infra? Last I checked all Apache software had to be
under subversion.
No
Agreed 100%, it applies across the board. We have two hurdles, one easy,
one not so easy:
1. fix the release plugin / scm provider.
2. convince infra to host a rw git repo.
Tim O'Brien wrote:
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it, contribu
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it, contribute it back without having to jump through the JIRA
+ patch + "convince a committer to pay attention" hoop. The main
difference here is that Git makes it really easy to merge in changes and
select
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other.
This hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet all contributors
will try to get th
cent Siveton
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: "Maven Developers List"
> Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 23:48
> Hi,
>
> GIT is already proposed by infrastructure in read only
> mode
> http://git.apache.org/
> Using GIT i
Hi,
GIT is already proposed by infrastructure in read only mode
http://git.apache.org/
Using GIT in write mode sounds like a normal step.
Does Maven SCM support *fully* GIT? I think specially for some plugins
like the release plugin
Cheers,
Vincent
2009/4/23 Jason van Zyl :
> Hi,
>
> Maven wa
nges being pulled by Jason and published in his repo
at the end of the day.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Robert Burrell Donkin schrieb am Do,
23.4.2009:
> Von: Robert Burrell Donkin
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: "Maven Developers List"
> Datum
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
> +1 for moving to git.
>
> Jukka already mirrors a lot of projets on GitHub and there is already a
> git.apache.org domain too (not sure where this leads too).
>
> Jason is already convinced, but for all other sceptics:
> Basically the loca
+0I never used GIT but I'm hearing a lot of good things about it and it is
already used by many opensources projects.
I would prefer to not have another drama with infra team if possible.
Perhaps we could help them to set it up if necessary ?
If you have tools for GIT on MacOS, do not hesitate to s
On the release plugin I believe John Smart has that working. And
having our release toolchain tested before switching is a completely
reasonable criterion.
That's my primary concern, that the tools support it, or we experiment
first to find out _how_ they work. It seems like from the maven
On 23-Apr-09, at 11:13 AM, John Casey wrote:
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the
question of what lives at the ASF if not the project source code.
Having said that, I understand the reasons for using an external
hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a little
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the question of
what lives at the ASF if not the project source code. Having said that,
I understand the reasons for using an external hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a little bit for utility projects and to
check out other o
I would like to start it with Maven 3.x only because I would be
willing to put in the effort to maintain it, find resources to
maintain it and support users.
I can't speak for everyone, but if we wanted to move everything to GIT
I would be in favor of that.
I think we basically decide whe
gt; Betreff: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: "Maven Developers List"
> Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 19:00
> Hi,
>
> Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and
> though there was a great deal of concern/noise about using
> JIRA
I'm fine with moving to Git. When you say it will start with Maven 3.x, what
does that include? Will all the trunks switch over or just components/trunk to
start with?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
great deal of concern/no
Excellent. I do not have a long history with Git but from the projects I
used I'm always annoyed when I have to the projects I develop using SVN. So,
if my vote counts anyway I'm +1. We started using it for OI4J and everyone
getting accustom is loving it. Soon, I hope, all OPS4J projects will be on
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was
a great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to
be a decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
I'm not particularly interested in mandating everything in Maven to
use GIT but I w
66 matches
Mail list logo
