Hi all,

Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).

I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.

Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
Thanks,
Hari

--
Hari Shreedharan

I use git to work on and just apply changes to a separate svn source
tree when committing. I would prefer git as primary though it isn't a
big deal for me.

On 07/11/2012 03:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>
> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>
> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>

I'm definitely +1 for moving to git as I personally prefer it over SVN.

Jarcec

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:55:47PM -0700, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>
> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>
> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>

+1 for git!

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> I'm definitely +1 for moving to git as I personally prefer it over SVN.
>
> Jarcec
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:55:47PM -0700, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary
> source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git
> svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been
> issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays -
> but now it looks like it is missing commits).
> >
> > I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move,
> to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant
> to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the
> community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
> >
> > Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about
> this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on
> that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hari
> >
> > --
> > Hari Shreedharan
> >
>

Does the review tool integrate with git?  By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it).  If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.

Ralph

On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>
> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>
> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>

Ralph,

Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.

Hari

--
Hari Shreedharan
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:

> Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
> >
> > I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
> >
> > Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hari
> >
> > --
> > Hari Shreedharan
> >
>
>
>

If you use a process like what is documented at https://help.github.com/articles/using-pull-requests would patches even be necessary?  I would hope that the review board could handle just using the GitHub tools at the very least.

Ralph

On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> Ralph,
>
> Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
>
> Hari
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>>>
>>> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>>>
>>> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hari
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

If it isn't obvious, I'm also in favor of this.  I think it has the potential to make the RTC process much better.

Ralph

On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:

> If you use a process like what is documented at https://help.github.com/articles/using-pull-requests would patches even be necessary?  I would hope that the review board could handle just using the GitHub tools at the very least.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>
>> Ralph,
>>
>> Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
>>
>> Hari
>>
>> --
>> Hari Shreedharan
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>
>>> Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>>>>
>>>> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>>>>
>>>> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Hari
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

+1 for git

--
Brock Noland
Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:

> If it isn't obvious, I'm also in favor of this. I think it has the potential to make the RTC process much better.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> > If you use a process like what is documented at https://help.github.com/articles/using-pull-requests would patches even be necessary? I would hope that the review board could handle just using the GitHub tools at the very least.
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> > On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> >
> > > Ralph,
> > >
> > > Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
> > >
> > > Hari
> > >
> > > --
> > > Hari Shreedharan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> > >
> > > > Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
> > > >
> > > > Ralph
> > > >
> > > > On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hari
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Hari Shreedharan
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Pull requests from a fork of the github mirror can be used for RTC, if the community agrees(CouchDB already uses this [1]), but we'd need to discuss bypassing the entire review board - commit by committer workflow separately. This would be a great advantage too.

Making local commits and pushing to your own github fork, I feel is a very efficient workflow, and when ready it can simply be merged through pull requests.

I will let this thread continue till Friday, and then contact ASF infra on how to proceed, after which I will start a vote. If infra requires someone to volunteer from the project, I am more than willing to do so. If anyone else is interested, please let me know.
Thanks,
Hari

[1] http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/ContributorWorkflow
--
Hari Shreedharan
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brock Noland wrote:

> +1 for git
>
> --
> Brock Noland
> Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> > If it isn't obvious, I'm also in favor of this. I think it has the potential to make the RTC process much better.
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> > On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >
> > > If you use a process like what is documented at https://help.github.com/articles/using-pull-requests would patches even be necessary? I would hope that the review board could handle just using the GitHub tools at the very least.
> > >
> > > Ralph
> > >
> > > On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ralph,
> > > >
> > > > Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
> > > >
> > > > Hari
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Hari Shreedharan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ralph
> > > > >
> > > > > On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Hari
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Hari Shreedharan
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

It looks like an email will be sent to the dev list in the following format (from the CouchDB list):
GitHub user mrloop opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/25 _session request response no longer cached In IE7 session request response was cached, using the already defined ajax helper function instead of jquery ajax resolves this. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/mrloop/couchdb master Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/25.patch ---- commit 8df02295c40179ad8332bd298dc49d37d76ee685 Author: Ewan McDougall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2012-06-07T04:34:54-07:00 Use ajax helper function for _session GET request to stop request cache in IE7 ----

By using the git pull method we can pull in the branch, and cherry-pick just the commits in the pull request, before pushing it to the apache git repo(this will remove the requirement of  A via B - git will add this though the author/committer metadata anyway), or we can choose the patch method which will be more traditional.

Thanks
Hari
--
Hari Shreedharan
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> Pull requests from a fork of the github mirror can be used for RTC, if the community agrees(CouchDB already uses this [1]), but we'd need to discuss bypassing the entire review board - commit by committer workflow separately. This would be a great advantage too.
>
> Making local commits and pushing to your own github fork, I feel is a very efficient workflow, and when ready it can simply be merged through pull requests.
>
> I will let this thread continue till Friday, and then contact ASF infra on how to proceed, after which I will start a vote. If infra requires someone to volunteer from the project, I am more than willing to do so. If anyone else is interested, please let me know.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/ContributorWorkflow
>
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brock Noland wrote:
>
> > +1 for git
> >
> > --
> > Brock Noland
> > Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >
> > > If it isn't obvious, I'm also in favor of this. I think it has the potential to make the RTC process much better.
> > >
> > > Ralph
> > >
> > > On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you use a process like what is documented at https://help.github.com/articles/using-pull-requests would patches even be necessary? I would hope that the review board could handle just using the GitHub tools at the very least.
> > > >
> > > > Ralph
> > > >
> > > > On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Ralph,
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hari
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Hari Shreedharan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ralph
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).

+1 for git!

Thanks,
Mubarak

On Jul 11, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> Ralph,
>
> Yes, review board does integrate with git pretty well. As of now, there is a repo called flume-git on review board which you need to select to submit a git generated patch. In fact, if we use git, we don't need to select the base folder etc(as we do for an svn patch), simply uploading the patch is enough.
>
> Hari
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>> Does the review tool integrate with git? By that I mean will patches still need to be added to the review tool or is it capable of figuring out the differences on its own if the enhancement/fix is on a "branch" (or fork or whatever it is that git calls it). If so, this would make RTC much more user friendly.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Jul 10, 2012, at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now it looks like it is missing commits).
>>>
>>> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move, to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>>>
>>> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hari
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hari Shreedharan
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

+1! Thanks for proposing this Hari.

Regarding review tools, I know some projects use Gerrit <
https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/> which integrates well with Git.

I'd like to try out how the GitHub pull request flow works before making it
required, personally. There is something to be said for the current
attribution system since both the author and reviewer get credit for the
work, even after branching and merging, etc.

Regards,
Mike
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source
> control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for
> commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues
> with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now
> it looks like it is missing commits).
>
> I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move,
> to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant
> to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the
> community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
>
> Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about
> this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on
> that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>

Mike,

We could test run gerrit, once our basic git repo is set up. I would also like to try using the pull request mechanism as the author credit will never go away how much ever branch/merge is done. Until anything is finalized, we should use the current setup - then add in Gerrit/pull request mechanism - one issue with pull requests is that it does not give a side-by-side view, of current v/s proposed code, which might be painful for large codebases.
Thanks,
Hari

--
Hari Shreedharan
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Mike Percy wrote:

> +1! Thanks for proposing this Hari.
>
> Regarding review tools, I know some projects use Gerrit <
> https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/> which integrates well with Git.
>
> I'd like to try out how the GitHub pull request flow works before making it
> required, personally. There is something to be said for the current
> attribution system since both the author and reviewer get credit for the
> work, even after branching and merging, etc.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Apache infra is now allowing projects to choose git as the primary source
> > control, if the project community choose so. I have been using git svn for
> > commits and git to maintain my repo, but recently there have been issues
> > with the git-svn sync (earlier git mirror had substantial delays - but now
> > it looks like it is missing commits).
> >
> > I would like to know how many of you would be interested in such a move,
> > to host Flume as wip git repo at Apache. Please note that this is not meant
> > to be a comparison of git and svn, this is just a discussion to gauge the
> > community's interest in using git as the primary source control.
> >
> > Also, please note that I have not communicated this with ASF Infra about
> > this, and I am not exactly sure how the move would work. I will work on
> > that if there is sufficient interest within the community.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hari
> >
> > --
> > Hari Shreedharan
> >
>
>
>

On Jul 11, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Mike Percy wrote:

> +1! Thanks for proposing this Hari.
>
> Regarding review tools, I know some projects use Gerrit <
> https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/> which integrates well with Git.
>
> I'd like to try out how the GitHub pull request flow works before making it
> required, personally. There is something to be said for the current
> attribution system since both the author and reviewer get credit for the
> work, even after branching and merging, etc.

That is an interesting point of view.  

In the other projects I work on that use CTR commits are made and then usually several people review them and only comment when changes are required. In those cases the fixes are usually done under the same Jira issue. What you are implying is that the Flume process actually results in less reviewing going on as it is committed after a single reviewer looks at it and then no one else looks at it. I would hope that there are more sets of eyes looking at changes than that so I don't see why just the one person who reviews the change should get credit. But I also have the feeling that the implication here is also that once something is committed if another person finds a problem that they would then have to create a new Jira issue to get it fixed, even if they find the problem 10 minutes after it is committed.

IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.

Ralph

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
>

Of course they should get the credit for the work.

Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list both
the author and the committer in the commit message.

Regards,
Mike

+1 for this proposal.  Git is fine for me.  I never back to SVN after I
touched git.

2012/7/12 Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
> >
>
> Of course they should get the credit for the work.
>
> Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
> time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list both
> the author and the committer in the commit message.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>

--

Best Regards

Leslin

+1 for using Git as primary source control system.

Thanks Hari for following up on this.

Regards,
Arvind Prabhakar

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Leslin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  +1 for this proposal.  Git is fine for me.  I never back to SVN after I
> touched git.
>
> 2012/7/12 Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
> > >
> >
> > Of course they should get the credit for the work.
> >
> > Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
> > time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list
> both
> > the author and the committer in the commit message.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> Leslin
>

I have stared a vote on this topic.  

--
Hari Shreedharan
On Friday, July 13, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:

> +1 for using Git as primary source control system.
>
> Thanks Hari for following up on this.
>
> Regards,
> Arvind Prabhakar
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Leslin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])> wrote:
>
> > +1 for this proposal. Git is fine for me. I never back to SVN after I
> > touched git.
> >
> > 2012/7/12 Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])>
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
> > >
> > > Of course they should get the credit for the work.
> > >
> > > Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
> > > time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list
> > >
> >
> > both
> > > the author and the committer in the commit message.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Mike
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Leslin

Current projects using git as primary version control: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf

--
Hari Shreedharan
On Sunday, July 15, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> I have stared a vote on this topic.  
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>
> On Friday, July 13, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
>
> > +1 for using Git as primary source control system.
> >
> > Thanks Hari for following up on this.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Arvind Prabhakar
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Leslin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for this proposal. Git is fine for me. I never back to SVN after I
> > > touched git.
> > >
> > > 2012/7/12 Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])>
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
> > > >
> > > > Of course they should get the credit for the work.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
> > > > time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list
> > > >
> > >
> > > both
> > > > the author and the committer in the commit message.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > >
> > > Leslin
>

I filed an Infra ticket for the migration: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5065

Thanks,
Hari

--
Hari Shreedharan
On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:

> Current projects using git as primary version control: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf
>
>
>
> --
> Hari Shreedharan
>
>
> On Sunday, July 15, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>
> > I have stared a vote on this topic.  
> >
> > --
> > Hari Shreedharan
> >
> >
> > On Friday, July 13, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for using Git as primary source control system.
> > >
> > > Thanks Hari for following up on this.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Arvind Prabhakar
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Leslin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for this proposal. Git is fine for me. I never back to SVN after I
> > > > touched git.
> > > >
> > > > 2012/7/12 Mike Percy <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])>
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > IMO the person who wrote the code is the one who should get credit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course they should get the credit for the work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone who has ever performed a careful code review knows that it can be
> > > > > time-consuming work. I assume that's one reason why we currently list
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > both
> > > > > the author and the committer in the commit message.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Mike
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards
> > > >
> > > > Leslin
> >
>