Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: Keeping CVS? was - Re: [PEAR-DEV] CVS 2 SVN

Hi,

limiting this to the svn list only for not spaming everybody.

Mind that the following comments represent my opinion mostly focused on
PHP itself, I can't judge about the needs for PEAR.

On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 12:11 -0400, Gwynne Raskind wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:41 AM, Joe Stump wrote:
> >> Once we're using GitHub, what are the benefits?
> > For me, they are as follows:
> >
> > 1. Built in bug tracking and wiki.

not sure what the benefit of the "interated" wiki to a wiki on php.net,
like wiki.php.net is but for the bug tracker I can say that github's
current bug tracker is kind of useless with PHP itself (can't judge fo
PEAR so) reasons include:
   - only way t categorize, assign etc. is by using tags which
     creates in PHP's case a mess with tons of tags which have to be
     combined
   - reporters can't be forced to enter a version number, OS, ... so
     all these things are hidden in the text and have to become labels
   - If somebody clones the tree he has is own bug tracker which isn't
     linked to the other which means duplicates and missing updates
   - I like our mails with the quik-solve links
   - ....

not that php.net's bug tacker is the best in the world but certainly
better than what I saw there.

> > 2. Fork Queue. I can't even begin to express the awesomesauce that  
> > is the Fork Queue. Ever get a patch to your project as an attachment  
> > in a bug and be too lazy to download, apply and commit? No worries,  
> > Fork Queue lists the patches from forks of your project and allows  
> > you to apply them quickly from a web interface.

This works or simple patches, real changes have to be tested befre being
applied, there you only hve ther benefits from git, don't see this ork
Queue thing as something interesting for PHP itself.

> > 3. A byproduct of GitHub is Git. Git was built by the leader of the  
> > largest FOSS project on the planet to meet his specific needs for  
> > managing a large, distributed, FOSS coding effort. I feel Git fits  
> > in SUPER well with PEAR2's notion of having mini-groups managing  
> > each category of packages as members can push code upstream to group  
> > leaders, etc.

Well, I'd consider github the byproduct of git ;-)
And that it is developped by people involved in "the largest FOSS
project" isn't a god argument, they have their development model and git
- initially - was developed by one person to support this person's
personal model and well, this person had the power to rule the tool on
others ;-)
But yes the distributed approach has many many advantages, even or
single person projects.


I personally would love using git, ad if there's somebody else who runs
the infrastructure I'm happy, too ... and the nice thing with a
distributed system there is that we don't have to trust them too much
and can still use it safely ... but as Gwynne said: there was just
limited support for git(hub) and there was nobody who really wanted to
drive it whereas most work for svn has been done and git on top of svn
works better than on top of CVS so svn is the current step.

johannes