[Kde-scm-interest] On Amarok Switching to Git

[Ian Monroe]

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
<bss at iguanasuicide.net> wrote:
> On Saturday 17 January 2009, Casey Link <unnamedrambler at gmail.com> wrote
> about 'Re: [Kde-scm-interest] On Amarok Switching to Git':
>>Leo and I brought this topic up at a break a few minutes ago during
>>Camp KDE, and immediately Chani and Thomas jumped in. We started
>>discussing technical and social hurdles that have to be crossed before
>>all of KDE can ditch svn for good.
>
> Well, Thiago went into a few of them in Message-id:
> <200901180017.06567.thiago at kde.org>.
>
> First, of all Amarok developers need to purge their tree of "svn:extern"s,
> handling them is non-trivial in git and I don't think anyone is really
> interested in that work.

Already done, sorry for this confusion. :)

> Beyond that, I think all the other issues can be resolved "in conference"
> with the Amarok developers.  I know Thiago isn't volunteering, but I
> *think* there are others on the list that may have time to discuss (and
> possibly implement) this.  I work a normal, US-Central, 40 hour week, so I
> could only kick in 8-10 hours a week regularly, irregular hours, on the
> weekend.  I think the Amarok team would like administrativa to have a
> faster turn-around time *AND*
>
> I'm not willing to do the work unless I have a couple of people I trust to
> add more hours.  I feel setting up a model KDE git infrastructure
> is "full-time work" for at least a few months until things get ironed out.

Yike I hope not.  Certainly we'll need some people around who know
what they're doing to be "on call" if there's trouble.

>>The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Amarok
>>switching to git initially before the rest of KDE. There are two
>>primary advantages to Amarok switching to git:
>>
>>1) The selfish reason: Amarok devs can finally share branches, and
>>fully utilize the power of git.
>>2) The egalitarian reason: We can blaze the trail for the rest of KDE,
>>by squashing bugs, annoyances, and generally pioneering the mass
>>svn->git switch.
>
> I see both reasons as valid.  However, I thought being "part of KDE" meant
> being maintained under the same source control.  That said, Amarok
> survived fine being not "part of KDE" in the past and I think it could
> flourish there again.

Amarok has been in KDE SVN since 2003, before version 0.6 which is pre-historic.

But being "part of kde" is mostly a social and political thing. So
like Amarok could just use github, but it'd probably be nice to use
git.kde.org and have the user list be synced with at least all the
svn+ssh users.

> If I git<->svn bridge needs to be built between a Amarok git tree and a KDE
> svn tree, that could be a problem.

Yea so this isn't needed at all and sounds rather counterproductive.