On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:47:17 -0800, Gustavo Noronha Silva <g...@gnome.org>
wrote:
I tend to think there is little or no benefit to switching to git while
keeping all of the project workflow in place. The fact that we would
want to keep a simple history with no merges in it pretty much defeat
any benefit that could be had. I think using git only makes sense if we
adopt git workflows, which would mean people would post git branches
for review instead of patches, and those branches would then get merged.
I agree.
I've lived through a large-scale git migration (from CVS, though, so it
had literally zero opposition from people, the big issue was
infrastructure constraints), and one of the greatest benefits was the
breadth of workflows git allows to choose from, so if people are mostly
happy with the current workflow, then "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"
probably applies.
Otherwise, the question might be how much easier would it be to experiment
with new workflows if we got rid of subversion altogether. Or if people
want to think about new workflows at all, for that matter.
Tbh, I am much more interested in doing away with ChangeLogs than in
feeling good about using git push instead of git svn dcommit. If we
could find a way around ChangeLogs while keeping svn, then I would be an
even happier panda than I am today =).
+1
--
pablo flouret
motorola | webkit / browser team
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
