Re: [SVN-MIGRATION] Github status
[email protected] (shire) Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:38:23 -0700
| Newsgroups | svn.migration |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > Ok, I don't think we have more replies coming now. > > I counted 10 yays, 3 ambivalents and 3 nays. One of the ambivalents > (Wez) would prefer SVN, so that is probably closer to a nay. 4 Nays, > from Andi, Derick, Brian Shire and Wez is pretty significant, despite > the enthusiasm of the yays. > > The wrinkle at this point is that Gwynne has run out of steam on the > Subversion migration. She has done a ton of work on it so far, but > unless we find a new volunteer for the final push, it won't happen. We > have enthusiastic volunteers for the Github effort. So, on that point > alone Github is ahead right now. > I didn't realize Gwynne had run out of steam, and I probably hadn't expressed this clearly before but I'm happy to help out with this conversion (I was under the impression that there isn't much left). Having a SVN repository I think makes a lot of the branch work and git usage much much simpler so I feel it's a big win. I just need some direction on what I can do to help. > I think most people would be fine, not completely happy, but fine with a > nicely working Subversion setup. We could perhaps maintain a git tree > next to it. If it is on the same host, perhaps we could synch it via a > post-commit or something so it would never fall behind. > > Or, if we don't have the volunteers for that sort of setup, we outsource > to Github pending them solving our acl issues. > Likewise I'm happy to help out with getting something git/git-hub setup. I would be more enthusiastic about github if I saw some features like the ACL, search capability, more compact display of history, and probably just a lot of power features I don't currently see on the interface now. (I have reservations about being so tied to a closed-source shop though). Despite it seeming like extra work, my interest would be in going forward with the SVN conversion, it'll be easier for us to sync to a git-hub/git repo at that point and if we find it compelling enough then a full conversion to git-hub should be pretty straight forward once we're satisfied with the features. -shire