Time based releases?

Leonardo Franchi lfranchi at kde.org
Fri Mar 27 21:17:01 CET 2009


On Friday 27 March 2009 19:58:08 Jeff Mitchell wrote:
> Mark Kretschmann wrote:
> > 10:03 < leinir> that whole branch thing - being able to develop new
> > stuff without trashing the whole app for months at a time :)
>
> Another thread we should revive.
>
> Everything is basically ready for whatever we decide to do until
> git.kde.org is ready (which we all know is more of a long-term thing
> because of scripty headaches and the like).  So until then, if people
> want to use git, I propose that we either:
>
> 1) Have one master git-svn checkout; everyone does their work on git;
> periodically we push back up (especially with string changes)
> 2) Keep using SVN for trunk, but have git available for people to
> individually store feature branches on (similar to how it was working
> with http on my server before, except properly).
>

I think it's only worth doing (1) if we do it at all. If we still use git-svn 
then we can't do all the cool things git lets us do like sharing branches and 
the like. So i don't see the point of (2). 

I would push for (1) but then we have issues---we need to do 2-way syncing 
(scripty commits etc). Also then do we require new contributors to use git? 
That kind of raises the bar (although if KDE is going to git in the long run, 
we may as well start.

How exactly would this "master" git-svn server work? Would all the individual 
commit data get retained transparently?

leo

> Regardless of which of these we use, as far as Git itself goes, the
> following are essentially ready to go, depending only on picking one and
> getting public SSH keys from people:
>
> 1) GitHub -- heard more nays than yeas about this (from those that
> responded) as it's not OSS.  It's actually not much more than gitosis
> with a few scripts and a non GitWeb frontend.
> 2) Gitorious -- not much different than Git + GitWeb, except we don't
> host it ourselves
> 3) Hosting Git + GitWeb ourselves with Gitosis (I already have this set
> up, and would be normal git protocol, not http)

I don't really care, but i think the simplest way is the way to go...

leo

-- 
-----
lfranchi at kde.org		Tufts  University 2010
leonardo.franchi at tufts.edu                The KDE Project


More information about the Amarok-devel mailing list