Re: Proposed git migration plan
Hi Sandro,
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> It seems to me like very vocal Git fanatics, who refuse to touch any
> package which is not maintained in Git (-.-), are pushing and pushing
> to that VCS without any clear advantage.
You might dismiss those people but you're speaking of true contributors
that you're aleniating here. If we really want to stay an all-inclusive
team we should use what the majority of (possible) contribtuors prefer
to use.
python-modules is about the only team I'm part of that is not yet using
git. It's an annoyance to have to continue to use svn-buildpackage when
I only use git everywhere else.
> Upstream releases history? why do we need to care, we are packagers we
> should care about packaging commits history.
Because your packaging decisions are not influenced by upstream changes?
> from the VCS again? seems kinda twisted to me :) And no, not the whole
> programming world is using Git for upstream code (sometimes we're not
> even able to teach upstream to use proper versions), so the usual
> mantra "I can pull from upstream repo and be happy ever after" is
> kinda weak.
Not everybody is using git but I think that you should face it, most
of the upstreams projects do.
> is there anything else so "attractive" about git?
It's 200% more easy to manage multiple branches and merge them properly.
Most of the average python modules will not need multiple branches but for
things like python-django, we do need multiple branches... and the fact
that svn is such a pain means that the security updates were not managed
in svn for example...
And handling security updates in svn is a pain because you can't commit
localy and push only when the security update is disclosed publicly.
etc.
All those are real problems for real people doing packaging work.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: