Re: RFC: Moving to github

>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Kipp <[email protected]> writes:

    Harald> Uwe, On 22.07.2015 12:33, Uwe Bonnes wrote:

    >> my mail what is worse with a svn-git setup from some days ago was
    >> unanswered.

    Harald> Probably because I explained "Worst of both world" in that same
    Harald> email.  It's mainly related to branching/merging. I'll try to
    Harald> explain it in more detail with other words.

    Harald> With Git I can fork a new public repository, change whatever I
    Harald> like, and, most important, I can easily fetch from and push to
    Harald> any other Git repository. This way I can freely cooperate with
    Harald> other developers. With SVN I have to do this via branches, which
    Harald> is more complicated and requires write access to the central
    Harald> repository. And, as we have had this in the past, avoiding
    Harald> lengthy discussions in the mailing list about how to implement a
    Harald> new feature, without any code ever appearing.

But what hinders you from using these functionality with git-svn based on an
"offical" SF NutOS? Nothing!

    Harald> SVN on the other hand offers an easy to handle revision
    Harald> mechanism, which makes maintaining release branches very
    Harald> comfortable. Example:

    Harald> Get the branch and cd into its directory with

    Harald>  svn co branches/4.8 local48 cd local48

    Harald> To see, which patches had been applied, use

    Harald>  svn propget svn:mergeinfo

    Harald> which gives

    Harald>  /branches/4.8:117-119 /trunk:203-204,316,322

    Harald> Release branches must not add new features, only fixes are
    Harald> allowed. They need to be selected manually. To see, what hasn't
    Harald> been applied use

    Harald>  svn mergeinfo --show-revs eligible ^/trunk

    Harald> which gives

    Harald>  r205 r210-300 r327-r331

    Harald> Now I can easily see, that last time I applied trunk:r322 and
    Harald> that I skipped anything before. Therefore I check r327-r329
    Harald> only. Let's say, that r327-r328 turn out to be a new feature,
    Harald> which I don't want in this older release. With

    Harald>  svn merge -r 329:331 svn commit

    Harald> I can merge the remaining fixes into the older 4.8 version.

Well, my git-svn clone from SF NutOS misses some parts. With the present
downtime, I can't update. But I am quite sure that all these information is
available with git-svn.

    Harald> Just a few steps with simple revision numbers. With Git this
    Harald> might not become much harder (except those lengthy hashes
    Harald> instead of nice rev-numbers). But isn't it significantly more
    Harald> effort with git-svn? Do you have extra time to handle this?

Working with git svn for quite some time now, I don't see the extra effort.

Bye
-- 
Uwe Bonnes                bon-1JbLm1bU5j5ZIx36JBfelj3+ndqKAYMe9FMPySWZwLkb1SvskN2V4Q@public.gmane.org

Institut fuer Kernphysik  Schlossgartenstrasse 9  64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
_______________________________________________
http://lists.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo/en-nut-discussion