1 |
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:48:29PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > 1. |
4 |
> > Discussion on merge policy. Originally I thought we would disallow merge |
5 |
> > commits, so that we would get a cleaner history. However, it turns out that if |
6 |
> > the repo ends up being pushed to different places with slightly different |
7 |
> > histories, merges are absolutely going to be required to prevent somebody from |
8 |
> > having to rebase at least one of their sets of commits that are already pushed. |
9 |
> Not sure I'm following, but I will be the first to admit that I'm a |
10 |
> git novice. Would this be aided by a convention, like only committing |
11 |
> to master on the gentoo official repository, and any on-the-side work |
12 |
> on places like github/etc stays in branches? Those repositories would |
13 |
> just keep getting fed commits on master from the official repository. |
14 |
Ok, let me try and reword my statement. |
15 |
|
16 |
- You have a commit, that you want to put into the Gentoo tree. |
17 |
- You have already pushed it to your github, signed |
18 |
- It needs to be merged/rebased so that it applies on the Gentoo tree. |
19 |
- If you force it to be a rebase so it applies on the tip, then you may |
20 |
have changed the history of your github tree, and broken any further |
21 |
forks. |
22 |
- If you permit a merge instead, nobody gets broken. |
23 |
|
24 |
> > 2. |
25 |
> > Git-SVN breakage. Why does this matter you're wondering? |
26 |
> > We need the newer Git for the commit signing, but it comes with a |
27 |
> > price, the git-svn binary has some major failures with SVN 1.7. |
28 |
> > Git since 1.7.8 has been broken this way. |
29 |
> To clarify - these won't be issues for gentoo per se, but there is a |
30 |
> sense that we can't stabilize the latest git because it will break it |
31 |
> for people using git-svn on non-gentoo work? |
32 |
As the Git maintainer, I will not keyword it for anybody until I know |
33 |
it's not going to lose/corrupt data, regardless of what they are using |
34 |
it for. |
35 |
|
36 |
I don't think there are many SVN repos left in Gentoo that haven't |
37 |
converted to using Git directly, so it's probably not a problem from |
38 |
that side. |
39 |
|
40 |
> If that is the case, what is our sense of how important this feature |
41 |
> even is to gentoo developers? They're the only ones who really have |
42 |
> to have the latest git to commit to the official tree. |
43 |
You'd be excluding me entirely, I need to use git-svn for other work |
44 |
projects, and emerging between two different versions of git would be |
45 |
very annoying (I switch constantly between the sides of work as they |
46 |
overlap). |
47 |
|
48 |
-- |
49 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
50 |
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead |
51 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
52 |
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 |