Hi,
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Konstantin Kolinko <knst.koli...@gmail.com>wrote: > 2014-05-24 0:51 GMT+04:00 Sylvain Laurent <slaur...@apache.org>: > > Hello, > > > > Back in january/february there was a thread on moving to git with many > +1 for it. Are there any concrete plans for this ? > > > > I'm looking forward to it as using SVN from Europe is so slow... or > maybe I'm now too accustomed to git's speed ;-) > > > > I was wondering what the workflow would be for tomcat development with > git : currently some commits are made on trunk, then potentially > selectively merged to tomcat 7 then 6. > > With git, how would it look like ? cherry picks ? that's not very in the > spirit of git. > > Or fixes on tomcat 6 or 7 and then merge to 8 ? In that case tomcat 8 > would be branch master and tomcat 6 and 7 would be on their own branch and > merges would look like 6 -> 7 -> master ? > > I'm quite used to such a workflow for enterprise app dev where we add > features to master, very rarely to the old/stable version... but this is > actually not the case with tomcat... > > I think we can be friendly to git mirrors with our svn configuration, > but I am that that we cannot move Tomcat to git now. > > My technical reasons: > 1. There is svn externals reference from Tomcat Native to Tomcat Trunk. > I am not expert in neither SVN externals nor in Git submodules but I think this should be OK with Git submodules assuming that both Tomcat and Tomcat Native are Git repos. See http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Submodules > 2. svn revision numbers are used on the config difference form in the > migration guide. > I guess this may become Git commit ids after the migration. > 3. The plan to create a Maven build (BZ 56397) relies on svn externals. > > My subjective reasons: > 4. I do not believe that git will be faster. > > - For Subversion there is mirror in Europe and "svn up" runs > considerably fast. For Git at Apache I think there is only one server > in USA, so I expect it to be slower. > My experience is the opposite. I live in Bulgaria and when Wicket used SVN even the EU mirror was very slow for me. With Git (US server!) it is definitely better. > > - Subversion Commit is expected to be slower, because it has to go to > US server (via write-through proxy in Europe) and it has to trigger > post-commit hooks. > > - With Subversion I have a single working copy that spans all 3 active > branches which I can update at once. > With Git this is possible too. I use git-new-workdir for that. See http://thejspr.com/blog/work-on-multiple-branches-with-git-workdir/ So I have three different folders on my file system - one for wicket-1.5.x branch, one for wicket-6.x and one for wicket-7.x (master) that all share the same .git/ folder. So git fetch updates all of them in one step. > > Is there a way to configure Git locally in the same way? Do I miss > something? > > My understanding that with Git I need to have several local > repositories, because working copy is tied to a repository instance > (the ".git" subdirectory). > > Even with configuration that Mark proposed (all branches in the same > repository), I would have several local copies of that repository. > > 5. I think Subversion is a lover entrance barrier than Git. As of now, > s/lover/lower/ ;) Yes, SVN is simpler. > we support both systems. > > - Subversion checkouts take less disk space. > - Subversion configuration on Windows platform is easier. > > Best regards, > Konstantin Kolinko > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
