[xwiki-devs] [PROPOSAL] Keep working on svn for 3.0 branch
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch. It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard. WDYT ? -- Thomas Mortagne
On Apr 8, 2011, at 3:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
WDYT ?
+1 good idea! -Vincent
On 04/08/2011 03:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
+1. An alternative would be to not have a 3.0.1 at all. This strategy should be applied for the 2.7 branch. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 15:44, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
On 04/08/2011 03:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
+1. An alternative would be to not have a 3.0.1 at all.
Yes I tough about that but lets say the branch is here and if there is something really blocker we have this solution for 3.0.
This strategy should be applied for the 2.7 branch.
+1 anyway we are supposed to since we already have a stable branch
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
Hi Thomas, On 04/08/2011 04:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
WDYT ?
I don't see what's the problem with using git for 3.0 branch. I thought git was better at branching and merging than svn. I tried a few merges and they all worked fine and anyway it's easier to resolve a merge conflict than to manually merge everything. I'm -1 for using *only* svn for 3.0 branch. I'm fine with being able to use both. Note that we already have the 3.0 and 2.7 branches on git and I already did a few commits on both of them. Thanks, Marius
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 17:33, Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Thomas,
On 04/08/2011 04:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
WDYT ?
I don't see what's the problem with using git for 3.0 branch. I thought git was better at branching and merging than svn. I tried a few merges and they all worked fine and anyway it's easier to resolve a merge conflict than to manually merge everything.
I'm -1 for using *only* svn for 3.0 branch. I'm fine with being able to use both. Note that we already have the 3.0 and 2.7 branches on git and I already did a few commits on both of them.
My proposal has nothing to do with merging/branching, it's simply that in trunk the whole platform is one repository which is not true for 3.0 so you only have core and none of application/plugins/skins and even web for 3.0 since theses would need to be in their own repository like we had in github before the refactoring
Thanks, Marius _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
On 04/18/2011 07:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 17:33, Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Thomas,
On 04/08/2011 04:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For simplicity I suggest we keep working on svn for the 3.0 branch. The project organization is very different between 3.1 and 3.0 and I don't see us doing the same refactoring on 3.0 branch.
It means merging stuff by hand but it's not very hard.
WDYT ?
I don't see what's the problem with using git for 3.0 branch. I thought git was better at branching and merging than svn. I tried a few merges and they all worked fine and anyway it's easier to resolve a merge conflict than to manually merge everything.
I'm -1 for using *only* svn for 3.0 branch. I'm fine with being able to use both. Note that we already have the 3.0 and 2.7 branches on git and I already did a few commits on both of them.
My proposal has nothing to do with merging/branching, it's simply that in trunk the whole platform is one repository which is not true for 3.0 so you only have core and none of application/plugins/skins and even web for 3.0 since theses would need to be in their own repository like we had in github before the refactoring
I don't think this is a problem. Most tools/applications don't need to be re-released, and even on SVN this would be hard, since we'd have to create a branch from a released tag, and we don't do that very often. The same principle can be applied on git, and we actually pulled colibri-1.27 into the xwiki-2.7 branch. In consequence, I'm changing my vote to use only git from now on, even for 2.7 and 3.0 bugfix releases. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
participants (4)
-
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol