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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> GIT


This[1] has been working out well for me at work. We recently made the
change from SVN to Git. Looking back, I think most problems we ran into
were due to people not thinking about where their fix/feature should go
which tended to cause a storm of cherry-picks.

Fast-forward to the present, I think it's been working out pretty well
for us with the clear definitions of, given a fixVersion for some unit
of work, what branch does it said work get committed to.

We also had much discussion about the naming of long-standing branches.
In hindsight, I think better tying branch names to the "quality" of the
code which should be there is best (stable, unstable, etc). I really
dislike the notion of having 1.4, 1.5, etc branches like we have in
subversion as this paradigm doesn't map to git (1.5 *has* all of 1.4 and
git knows this). This is likely another discussion we'll have.

[1] http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

On 5/22/13 10:40 AM, Billie Rinaldi wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Michael Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 but it is more than just changing tools. Have a discussion about a git
>>> workflow and branching model. I have seen that be a point of frustration
>>> for many projects making the switch.
>>>
>>
>> Thats a good point.  I agree, we should decide on this before switching.
>>
>
> I am in favor of git but am not familiar with possible workflow and
> branching models.  Could someone suggest models that we should be
> considering?
>
> Billie
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 21, 2013 6:29 PM, "Benson Margulies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Everything at Apache is a work in progress. Plenty of projects are
>> using
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Mike Drob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> Looks like git support is available, but still a work in progress.
>> See
>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:05 PM, David Medinets
>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought we were constrained by apache's subversion repo?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what we are constrained by.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 5:51 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Christopher <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm sure this has been entertained before, I'm starting to
>> think
>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> we should seriously consider switching to git, maybe sooner
>>> (during
>>>>>>>>> 1.6 development cycle?).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>>>>>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>