Re: [SVN-MIGRATION] GitHub and ACLs

Hi all.

> Philip Olson wrote:
> > On 21 Apr 2009, at 12:11, shire wrote:
> >> sean finney wrote:
> >>> hi travis,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 05:56:30PM -0500, Travis Swicegood wrote:
> >>>> needed before PHP could consider jumping onboard. He's hacked up a
> >>>> proof of concept that he's going to start working with. The code is
> >>>> online at:
> >>>> http://github.com/schacon/githooks/blob/88b25d960050a90c3143d13d72faea72fab6b907/update
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> i thought there was already agreement that we were going to move to
> >>> svn, with
> >>> a possible git-svn bridge available for us git users? has that changed?
> >>>
> >>
> >> That was my understanding.
> >
> > It still looks open pending peoples desires and actions. The desire for
> > git feels stronger than svn.
> 
> My impression from the conversation (and the nature of the initial email) was that there was more interest in git-hub specifically than git itself.  If that's not correct, then git-hub is really of no consequence, but I feel like this is really a discussion about git-hub not so much GIT.
> 
> >
> > I like the simplicity. And for those times we need alternatives then I
> > see people using git cli and/or [possibly] an additional web interface
> > at php.net.
> >
> 
> I would be fine with this, but I felt that the primary motivation to move to git was git-hub not git itself, as such I don't find it currently compelling enough.  If we want to discuss the differences between git and svn, then I believe that's slightly different. I feel that git is in many ways a more powerful SCM tool, as long as it's not felt as a significant learning difficulty for others who don't currently use it.
> 
> I'm interested in moving off of CVS, regardless of whatever that may be to.  If we move to git-hub I would prefer to see us do it because we feel GIT is the best fit for PHP, not so much that we want the git-hub interface.  Additionally, as I'm eager to get to a newer SCM model, my interest in SVN is significantly tied to getting our partial conversion completed rather than delaying it for movement to another SCM that can easily be bridged to SVN.  Alternatively if we're certain we want to go to GIT regardless of Git-hub, and a CVS->SVN->GIT route is unnecessarily complicated then we should probably decide to go with GIT now.

I'm in general agreement with shire here, but I do have reservations
about moving to Git/Git-hub.

Initially, I was suspicious of moving to the latest/greatest SCM tool;
thinking it was just getting the latest toy for the sake of it being the
newest.  I welcomed the move to SVN as I am already familiar with it and
simply do not get on with CVS. I run a single batch file to download the
5.3 source for compiling and that's as much of CVS as I can stand ;-)

However, last week I bit the bullet and decided I should first look into
Git before making judgement. So I found what documentation I could on
the concepts, and watched a couple of Google TechTalks from Linus
Torvalds and Randal Schwartz.  Now I'm converted to the idea, in
principal at least.

But now we come to the reservations.  I work on WIndows, unfortunately a
necessity, so I cannot change that.  When the move to SVN was first
mentioned on internals, I recall part of the reasoning was that it was a
mature technology with good, stable, and mature tools available for the
major platforms.  Even Windows users have good tools available, in the
form of TortoiseSVN amongst others.
However, on looking for tools for Git on Windows, I have been badly
disappointed.  There appear to be very few tools available, and of those,
none are yet complete and certainly not stable. 
The best of those around, I could find to try was msysGit .  msysGit is
currently incomplete in it's features. Of those features 'complete'  I
was unable to get some basic ones to work (right-clicking a line and
removing it from the update, for example)

While I would very much like to see a move to Git, I do not think that
it is ready for Windows users yet.  *nix users can already use it, if
that is their choice, as there are methods to get source from CVS into a
Git repo to work on then export back to CVS.  This same methodology
could also be used for an SVN/Git bridge once/if PHP moves to SVN.  This
would at least let SVN users be able to contribute back to PHP and so
potentially bring in more contributors (myself included).  Then when Git
is more supported across the platforms, the transition would hopefully be less
difficult.

> > Agreed that the search could be improved [and it likely will be] but the
> > tagged filters are nice. I do feel today it could replace lxr.php.net
> > although the regular expression search would be missed. Let's request
> > this feature. Maybe google codesearch could somehow be integrated and
> > manipulated to nicely handle revisions/history.
> >
> 
> Yeah, definitely sounds like a useful feature to me.
> 
> 
> > The blame widths are a concern although I'm not sure how it would be
> > solved... maybe losing the frame would help. I could not find a blame
> > feature with other git web interfaces for comparison, but viewvc does a
> > decent job. And it looks like the ACL customization option for github is
> > available to us.
> 
> 
> Expanding that view to the full width of the browser would likely go a long ways to fixing some of the code browsing and blames.  Most of this is styling, that I think could easily be fixed or at least improved, it would seem a lot of the style on these pages is bent towards simplicity (which is good) and in some cases unintentionally costing some usability.
> 
> 
> -shire
> 
> 
> -- 
> SVN Migration Project Mailing List (http://svn.php.net)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> 

--
Niel Archer
niel.archer (at) blueyonder.co.uk