[wp-hackers] Switching from SVN

[Ankur Oberoi]

I think moving to distributed scm is a good thing for all.

With that said if some don't want to change their workflow, there is a
solution. git-svn is a tool that comes with git and is a two-way
bridge to svn so I can have the svn history in my git repo and commit
back to svn when I want to merge to that remote. It's a good
intermediate solution if you really want to work in the git workflow
and svn is what you are stuck with.

But the biggest advantage I see is that the notion of "blessed commit
access" would be nullified. Linus put it well in his Google Tech Talk
of 07. You basically look at branches that are proven, already merged,
and possibly have a little fan following already and the acceptance is
simple and painless. The politics of commit access is completely
avoided and more time in the community is spent on coding and adding
features.

As for the plugin repository, asking people to resubmit seems like a
lot to ask, using git-svn for those older ones could be an option
while allowing the newer ones to submit an alternative git repo would
make sense to me.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 9, 2010, at 3:21 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Eric Mann <eric at eam.me> wrote:
>> With SVN on a dedicated repository, it's easy to just revert changes and
>> track down your bug.
>
> I prefer to just write my code correctly the first time, but I get
> what you're saying. ;)
>
> I guess I tend to see patches as single purpose, small things. Rarely
> do we see patches that add huge new swathes of functionality. And when
> they do, it's generally done in entirely new files, then core is
> modified only to hook it into the proper places and what not. So I'm
> not sure of the value of having a local repo.
>
> Of course, if I wanted a local repo, then it's just a matter of a
> minutes to install an SVN server and make one.
>
> The thing that weirds me out is the repo merge process. From what I've
> seen on the topic, that "pull" request, if honored, will not only
> merge the main patch back in, but also all the changes made locally in
> too. That's definitely something we don't want. I don't want to see
> your whole development process for your patch. I just want the final
> patch. Adding all your local changes and such back in is cluttering
> and annoying.
>
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers