Re: Git vs SVN
Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/11/14 Eddy Petrișor <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>> Maybe creating a wiki page with "how to release/new upstream/tag/etc"
>> instructions for SVN and git, with a side-by-side comparison?
> Yup, that would be great, it would make things easier.
>> Are there any DGT live meetings scheduled in the next 3-6 months?
>> Could we do that somehow?
> We don't have any scheduled AFAIK, but it should be doable. It would
> be interesting. I don't know if everyone could be there anyway
> (timezones, and so) but I think it would be good to start deciding on
> the next steps after Lenny. One of the goals might be to switch to
> git, or not, but we might want to talk about it.
> Any other thoughts on this from the rest of the people?
Hmmm... You said I could defend my point of view, so, here it is. I
have nothing against new packages being packaged with git, and some of
the old packages being switched to git when there is a consensus *and it
is removed from the SVN repository*.
I strongly object to the global switch. It's a waste of time and
energy, for the benefits of only a few. I'm not sure I would go on
working in the team if all the packages I'm interested in would move to git.
Feel free to experiment and switch some of the packages, but, please
do not impose additional work to all the team members.
PS: honestly, as far as debian packaging is concerned, I don't see much
benefits with git. Quoting Eddy Petrișor:
"Only the benefit of being able to no longer store tarballs
is (for me) reason enough to switch."
For me, there's no need of that when you know how to write a watchfile...
Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer
Au royaume des aveugles, il y a des borgnes à ne pas dépasser.
-- Soeur Marie-Thérèse des Batignoles (Maëster)
Vincent, listening to Misty Mountain Hop (Led Zeppelin)