https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5111
On 07/30/2012 08:40 PM, Chris Burroughs wrote:
> I was originally going to follow this was a [VOTE] thread, but most of
> the responses are a +1 anyway. I think we can do this and it will be a
> significant improvement. I'll follow up with INFRA t
History is preserved, it *should* look more or less just like the
current read/only git mirrors. I'll definitely circle back here with
any other complications.
On 07/31/2012 12:08 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Thanks for following up with this. Do we lose the commit history when
> moving to gi
Chris,
Thanks for following up with this. Do we lose the commit history when
moving to git? If so, maybe it's better to wait until 0.8 is released.
Jun
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Chris Burroughs
wrote:
> I was originally going to follow this was a [VOTE] thread, but most of
> the response
I was originally going to follow this was a [VOTE] thread, but most of
the responses are a +1 anyway. I think we can do this and it will be a
significant improvement. I'll follow up with INFRA this week.
We don't have to do this, or do it now. So if anyone does have concerns
please do speak up.
Just to throw in (an admittedly external) $0.02: with Git, at least, *everyone*
has a full copy of the repo, +/- local changes, so even a catastrophic failure
of the apache Git servers would still allow a reconstruct of the repo elsewhere
(say GitHub, or a different apache server). AFAIK, this i
On 07/26/2012 02:43 PM, Joel Koshy wrote:
> +1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been working
> pretty well for me for local work/code review. So if the caveats you
> mention are significant enough then maybe we should stay on svn?
I think the caveats are of the "things *coul
+1
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Jonathan Creasy wrote:
> +1
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Jay Kreps wrote:
>
> > I am +1 as well.
> >
> > -Jay
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Joel Koshy
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been work
+1
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Jay Kreps wrote:
> I am +1 as well.
>
> -Jay
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Joel Koshy wrote:
>
> > +1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been working
> > pretty well for me for local work/code review. So if the caveats you
> > men
I am +1 as well.
-Jay
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Joel Koshy wrote:
> +1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been working
> pretty well for me for local work/code review. So if the caveats you
> mention are significant enough then maybe we should stay on svn?
>
> Joel
+1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been working
pretty well for me for local work/code review. So if the caveats you
mention are significant enough then maybe we should stay on svn?
Joel
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Taylor Gautier wrote:
> I prefer git…
>
> On Thu, J
I prefer git…
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
> +1 for moving to git.
>
> Thanks,
> Neha
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Chris Burroughs
> wrote:
> > It came up in the 0.7.2 thread that with the number of parallel branches
> > git may be preferable to svn for our curre
+1 for moving to git.
Thanks,
Neha
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:39 AM, Chris Burroughs
wrote:
> It came up in the 0.7.2 thread that with the number of parallel branches
> git may be preferable to svn for our current and future workflow. I'd
> like to gauge interest in possibly switching from svn t
It came up in the 0.7.2 thread that with the number of parallel branches
git may be preferable to svn for our current and future workflow. I'd
like to gauge interest in possibly switching from svn to git.
Currently INFRA can provide read/write git hosting at
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/. Repos
13 matches
Mail list logo
