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

Switch to Plain View
Accumulo, mail # dev - SVN or GIT


+
dlmarion@... 2013-08-22, 00:05
+
Josh Elser 2013-08-22, 00:09
+
dlmarion@... 2013-08-22, 00:14
+
Christopher 2013-08-26, 18:41
+
Keith Turner 2013-08-26, 19:41
+
Mike Drob 2013-08-26, 20:16
+
Michael Ridley 2013-08-29, 02:51
+
John Vines 2013-08-29, 03:00
Copy link to this message
-
Re: SVN or GIT
Christopher 2013-08-30, 18:56
ACCUMULO-1678

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:00 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's right, Michael.
>
>
> Also, agree
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Michael Ridley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> This sounds like a good approach to me.
>>
>> (Long time listener, first time caller - my understanding is that I can't
>> vote but I can comment..,yes...?)
>>
>> Michael Ridley
>> Sent from my mobile.
>> Pardon any spelling errors.
>>
>> On Aug 26, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Since we're on git now... to avoid confusion like this in the future
>> > (not just from PMC/committers who may not have touched the code in
>> > awhile, but also from users looking for the source)...
>> >
>> > I think it would be useful to do what Thrift did, and replace the
>> > existing source branches in SVN with a README
>> > (https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/thrift/README?view=log). The SVN
>> > history will still be there, and people will still be able to
>> > reference tags, just like with thrift
>> > (https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/thrift/tags/thrift-0.8.0/?pathrev=1419982
>> ).
>> >
>> > I'm personally in favor of removing all of
>> > {trunk,branches,contrib,tags} with a README, but if people insist on
>> > {tags} remaining behind, I'd settle for replacing only the other
>> > three. (Technically, the tags are still there... at the version they
>> > were created... which is the only reliable way of referencing a tag in
>> > SVN anyway... so that's why I don't mind removing them in SVN HEAD).
>> >
>> > To make things easier on passers-by, we can document in the README,
>> > the last commit that occurred in SVN, and provide a viewvc link
>> > directly to that, and can also provide the svn command to check out
>> > that revision.
>> >
>> > Removing these paths from the SVN will help resolve any confusion
>> > about where our current development activity is taking place.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Christopher L Tubbs II
>> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 8:14 PM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Thanks Josh.
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >>
>> >> From: "Josh Elser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 8:09:36 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: SVN or GIT
>> >>
>> >> No, SVN is not an option for main Accumulo development.
>> >>
>> >> The CMS site is still hosted on SVN, that's why the SVN info is still
>> >> there at all. It could possibly be trimmed some more -- I forget where I
>> >> left it.
>> >>
>> >> On 08/21/2013 08:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>> Have not committed anything in a while. I read the GIT WIP wiki page.
>> Is svn still an option at this point, or do I need to move over to git.
>> What's the latest?
>> >>
>> >>
>>