Contreras<felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would like to see soap4r on github. What do you think about that >> idea?
> I like the idea, and I know a few git tricks, I would gladly help in > the migration.
Good idea. Some thoughts.
1. I need to maintain soap4r + httpclient at least 5 years because I used it for my job last year. 2. I'll use svn + Trac for the time being because of issue tracking maintenance. I'm using GibHub Issues but it seems a little simpler than I expecting for now. (http://github.com/nahi/f2p/issues) 3. Developers who need to use soap4r should be able to hack XML Schema, SSL, etc so they would need easy-to-use repository for soap4r. Also I can pull the fix from it.
For the last reason, soap4r should have the mirror git repository at GitHub. Am I understand correctly?
Corny, Felipe, would you teach me what should I do for that? All branches in svn (it's just a copy though) are mirrored to github?
I'll fix current trunk and branches/1_5 confusion soon. I found that too much work needed for ruby_1_9 so I'll merge trunk and 1_5 at first. After releasing 1.5.9 I'll reconsider how I can give a try for ruby_1_9.
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 02:50, Felipe > Contreras<felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I would like to see soap4r on github. What do you think about that >>> idea?
>> I like the idea, and I know a few git tricks, I would gladly help in >> the migration.
> Good idea. Some thoughts.
> 1. I need to maintain soap4r + httpclient at least 5 years because I > used it for my job last year. > 2. I'll use svn + Trac for the time being because of issue tracking > maintenance. I'm using GibHub Issues but it seems a little simpler > than I expecting for now. (http://github.com/nahi/f2p/issues) > 3. Developers who need to use soap4r should be able to hack XML > Schema, SSL, etc so they would need easy-to-use repository for soap4r. > Also I can pull the fix from it.
> For the last reason, soap4r should have the mirror git repository at > GitHub. Am I understand correctly?
> Corny, Felipe, would you teach me what should I do for that? All > branches in svn (it's just a copy though) are mirrored to github?
> I'll fix current trunk and branches/1_5 confusion soon. I found that > too much work needed for ruby_1_9 so I'll merge trunk and 1_5 at > first. After releasing 1.5.9 I'll reconsider how I can give a try for > ruby_1_9.
Ok, you've piqued my interest as a developer who maintains his own source repos. I've just moved my own source repositories from CVS to SVN a few years ago. There were some compelling reasons to do so. What compelling features does Git offer over Subversion? Just curious. We can spin this off into a separate thread so as not to threadjack if you guys prefer.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Keith Bennett<keithrbenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hiroshi -
> There is a Git adapter for Subversion called git-svn.
> If you want, you could use git-svn to access your Subversion repository for > a while to get used to git before actually changing the repository itself.
> On Jun 10, 2009, at 1:17 AM, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 02:50, Felipe >> Contreras<felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I would like to see soap4r on github. What do you think about that >>>> idea?
>>> I like the idea, and I know a few git tricks, I would gladly help in >>> the migration.
>> Good idea. Some thoughts.
>> 1. I need to maintain soap4r + httpclient at least 5 years because I >> used it for my job last year. >> 2. I'll use svn + Trac for the time being because of issue tracking >> maintenance. I'm using GibHub Issues but it seems a little simpler >> than I expecting for now. (http://github.com/nahi/f2p/issues) >> 3. Developers who need to use soap4r should be able to hack XML >> Schema, SSL, etc so they would need easy-to-use repository for soap4r. >> Also I can pull the fix from it.
>> For the last reason, soap4r should have the mirror git repository at >> GitHub. Am I understand correctly?
>> Corny, Felipe, would you teach me what should I do for that? All >> branches in svn (it's just a copy though) are mirrored to github?
>> I'll fix current trunk and branches/1_5 confusion soon. I found that >> too much work needed for ruby_1_9 so I'll merge trunk and 1_5 at >> first. After releasing 1.5.9 I'll reconsider how I can give a try for >> ruby_1_9.
>> Regards, >> // NaHi
-- "And it is true what you said That I live like a hermit in my own head But when the sun shines again I'll pull the curtains and blinds to let the light in" ~ Death Cab for Cutie
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:17 AM, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nakah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 02:50, Felipe > Contreras<felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I would like to see soap4r on github. What do you think about that >>> idea?
>> I like the idea, and I know a few git tricks, I would gladly help in >> the migration.
> Good idea. Some thoughts.
> 1. I need to maintain soap4r + httpclient at least 5 years because I > used it for my job last year. > 2. I'll use svn + Trac for the time being because of issue tracking > maintenance. I'm using GibHub Issues but it seems a little simpler > than I expecting for now. (http://github.com/nahi/f2p/issues) > 3. Developers who need to use soap4r should be able to hack XML > Schema, SSL, etc so they would need easy-to-use repository for soap4r. > Also I can pull the fix from it.
> For the last reason, soap4r should have the mirror git repository at > GitHub. Am I understand correctly?
> Corny, Felipe, would you teach me what should I do for that? All > branches in svn (it's just a copy though) are mirrored to github?
I think we should move completely to git. You can still use Trac for ticket handling, and even integrate git to it.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Joseph Reeves <joseph.ree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, you've piqued my interest as a developer who maintains his own > source repos. I've just moved my own source repositories from CVS to > SVN a few years ago. There were some compelling reasons to do so. What > compelling features does Git offer over Subversion? Just curious. We > can spin this off into a separate thread so as not to threadjack if > you guys prefer.
Have you seen Linus Torvalds' video? I think he pretty much explains why svn is not desirable.
|
