Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Pig >> mail # dev >> Making git the repo of choice for Pig?

Copy link to this message
Re: Making git the repo of choice for Pig?
Major +1 for moving Piggybank to github.  


On Apr 3, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Russell Jurney wrote:

> Some more info is available here, for the Cassandra project:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4254
> https://github.com/apache/cassandra
> http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/HowToContribute
> I have a proposal to make... since we're not yet up for this, but do agree
> that it is the future: what if we move Piggybank to github?
> We can do this at the hackathon we're having at Twitter - I forgot the date?
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Scott Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>> Git was built with use case #1 being Linux developers exchanging patches
>> as text via e-mail.  I am not sure what binary patch support Linus plans
>> or what it would help other than being more compact.  One disadvantage is
>> that it is then hard to review simple changes by simply reading the patch
>> itself in a text editor.  I have +1'd many near-trivial changes after only
>> glancing at the text of the patch.
>> SVN is (slowly) catching up to have better patch features.  'svn patch' is
>> now in 1.7, 1.8 will enhance it, and eventually there is planned support
>> for git patch extensions. In the long run the differences between the
>> tools for day-to-day work will shrink from where it is now.  Subversion is
>> planning 'svn shelve' to make it more git-like when working locally, for
>> example.
>> On 3/27/12 10:43 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Could you enumerate the problems you have with text patches?
>>> I can think of 1, but would like to hear your list.
>>> Dmitriy
>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Russell Jurney
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Using text patches is the problem as I see it.  We should be using...
>>>> something else.  Doesn't git's functionality enable phasing out text
>>>> patches?
>>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Scott Carey
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>>>> On the Avro project, several folk generate a patch using git and upload
>>>>> that to the JIRA, it patches fine using unix 'patch'.
>>>>> Why do you need to switch to svn to generate the patch?
>>>>> A committer needs to apply the patch to a location checked out with
>>>>> svn,
>>>>> but that is trivial.
>>>>> On 3/27/12 2:26 AM, "Gianmarco De Francisci Morales" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> My 2 cents, based on the S4 project experience so far (they have git)
>>>>> is
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> but later.
>>>>>> The process with git is still a bit fuzzy and not fully integrated and
>>>>>> standardized like the one with svn.
>>>>>> I personally use git for all my dev work with Pig, but then switch to
>>>>> svn
>>>>>> to generate the final patch. A bit cumbersome but not so bad.
>>>>>> Switching now will generate confusion and is not that urgent in my
>>>>> humble
>>>>>> opinion.
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Gianmarco
>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 01:27, Dmitriy Ryaboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> There is a check box you check when you upload a patch. If we
>>>>> committed
>>>>>>> without verifying you checked it, thats an unfortunate oversight.
>>>>>>> No, you cant send a pull request via github to apache. That's a
>>>>> github
>>>>>>> (commercial entity) feature, not a git (open source vcs) feature.
>>>>>>> Yes you can post a link on a Jira and ask people for review prior to
>>>>>>> submitting a formal patch.  No that's not review board or Jira
>>>>>>> integration.
>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 2012, at 5:59 PM, Russell Jurney
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> That is fine.  Only committers can merge pull requests.  Not a
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>> I've never signed anything, and committers take my patches.
>>>>> Works the
>>>>>>> same.
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3