[DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Antono Vasiljev
Hello, All. I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. Local repo size: Git: 34M SVN: 598M WTF? 598MB and there is no local history? Ok. I checked out topmost directory. Lets check trunk/ $ cd trunk $ du -sh 84M Much better, but: - no history - no light branches - no my

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 17/01/11 at 13:53 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: > Hello, All. > > I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. > > Local repo size: > Git: 34M > SVN: 598M > > WTF? 598MB and there is no local history? > > Ok. I checked out topmost directory. Lets check trunk/ > $ cd trunk >

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Joshua Timberman
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Antono Vasiljev wrote: > > Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? > > So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. > > Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. I'm +1 for Git. We use it at Opscode for all our softwar

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Joshua Timberman
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. > > That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on > svn-bp. Would it really be a big deal to change the workflow to use git-buildpackage? I don't even use git-buildpackage fo

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 17/01/11 at 10:09 -0700, Joshua Timberman wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Lucas Nussbaum > wrote: > > svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. > > > > That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on > > svn-bp. > > Would it really be a big deal to change the wor

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Antono Vasiljev
Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 20:30:56 +0200 2011: > > > svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. > > > That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on > > > svn-bp. > > Ok. Let's think positive. What required in order to replace > > svn-buildpackage wi

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-17 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 17/01/11 at 20:55 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: > Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 20:30:56 +0200 2011: > > > > > svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. > > > > That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on > > > > svn-bp. > > > Ok. Let's think posi

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-18 Thread Antono Vasiljev
Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 14:12:46 +0200 2011: > > Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? > > So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. > > Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. > > svn-buildpackage wouldn't work wit

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-18 Thread Gunnar Wolf
Antono Vasiljev dijo [Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 01:53:55PM +0200]: > Hello, All. > > I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. > (...) > > Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? > > So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. > > I

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-18 Thread Antono Vasiljev
Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 21:41:15 +0200 2011: > > > I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be > > > defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git > > > for new projects too. > > > > It's easier to contribute and

Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git

2011-01-18 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 18/01/11 at 22:05 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: > Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 21:41:15 +0200 2011: > > > > > I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be > > > > defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git > > > >