Re: GNOME git repositories? (was Re: GNOME subversion migration)
- From: Germán Poó Caamaño <gpoo ubiobio cl>
- To: Danilo Šegan <danilo gnome org>
- Cc: Kjartan Maraas <kmaraas broadpark no>, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: GNOME git repositories? (was Re: GNOME subversion migration)
- Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 18:44:58 -0300
On Tue, 2006-12-26 at 22:21 +0100, Danilo Šegan wrote:
> Hi Kjartan,
> Today at 22:12, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
> > Maybe we should consider setting up a formal git infrastructure so that
> > projects that want to use git will have a way to distribute their
> > repositories in a more standard way across GNOME?
> > git.gnome.org anyone? With a gitweb interface?
> And bzr? Mercurial? (I know at least some would be interested in using
> bzr, and I even remember some discussion about it on #gnome-hackers)
bzr can pull/push from/to svn. For mercurial users, bzr has a
similar behavior, just slower. I don't see any trouble on this.
On the other hand, git is more Linux centric.
> This would encourage developers to use non-central repositories, thus
> making work of non-developers (think translators, artists,
> documentors) much harder. In other words, GNOME "subprojects" would
> not be able to work with those other repositories as easily as with
> the main CVS/SVN one.
That is a big misunderstanding about how it works. Using a distributed
source system doesn't mean that doesn't exist any central ('main')
Moreover, it can works the same way it has been working until now.
The big difference is any contributor can have his or her own copy
of the repository (as usual) but the whole history.
One best practice is 'commit early, commit often and merge with main
Your concern could happen even today if the developer doesn't commit
his or her code from his or her copy. Nobody cares, because 'main'
Concepción - Chile
] [Thread Prev