[Kde-scm-interest] On Amarok Switching to Git
ian.monroe at gmail.com
Sun Jan 18 18:41:58 CET 2009
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Thiago Macieira <thiago at kde.org> wrote:
> Ian Monroe wrote:
>>> 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
>>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
> I don't see the problem here. We can move the modules one by one.
> But we should have a consensus on doing so. I'd hate to have only Amarok
> on Git, plus smaller, new projects that people start, while the majority
> of the projects remains on SVN.
> I, for one, would advocate for kdelibs to switch to Git[*]. That way, we
> force everyone to start using it and learning it. Eventually, everything
> would follow suit.
> [*] This is my selfish reason. And I've said more than once that I will
> not backport my commits until we switch to Git.
You don't see any benefit to having a project like Amarok try things out?
I mean we need to go and get something done. Finding a consensus for
kdelibs switching essentially means finding a consensus of the entire
KDE community. Look at the firestorm in gnome going on currently, I
don't think its so useful. I think finding that consensus will be
easier when we can say point to KDE projects successfully making the
Of course maybe I'm misguided in thinking that the git switch hasn't
happened yet due to political reasons. Either way the challenges in
switching Amarok is a large subset of challenges of switching kdelibs,
so lets find solutions. My mind is being boggled by scripty currently.
More information about the Kde-scm-interest