Re: How is 1.4 doing?

[Jeff Kowalczyk <..hidden..>]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:49:36 +0000, Ed W wrote:
> Can I request that you consider GIT again.  I know it's come up before,
> but it really is a very interesting system for maintaining parallel code
> trees, especially where you want to get contributions back up the tree
> 
> For example it would allow me to track "head", whilst at the same time
> maintaining my own customised installation, AND at some later stage I
> can push back some of my changes here.  This is quite hard to achieve
> using SVN.  Obviously Mercurial, et al also achieve this goal, but
> personally I have most experience in git

I think git has some support among LedgerSMB users and committers. I'll
certainly step up to do anything necessary to effect a switchover. But we
can start individual collaborations with git until we can generate enough
momentum to switch upstream.

Those of us with local branches (including those who aren't yet using
version control for their customizations) can use some conventions with
public use of git to make it easier for the core committers and
integrator/users to cherrypick our branches.

Some conventions that come to mind:

1. Git hosting github (or gitorious, but we should choose one for the
fork-tracking network effects).

2. (Github) Public repository name: username/ledgersmb-username 

3. Branch name conventions, e.g.:  1.2_SF2553905_ps2pdf  is a branch kept
rebased to 1.2 HEAD, representing minimal diff for that particular
Sourceforge Bug number proposed fix or enhancement.

3. Commits should be made with email address set to the one you'd want in
the permanent commit record. Github and SF usernames should be the same,
if you have both.

I'll start by pushing my branches out to github soon. I do a lot of git
locally, but got a bit confused when pushing remote branches branched
from svn.

My original goal was to make a git svn mirror available. I expect that
remote branches would be easier with a git-only scenario, but we're not
there at the moment.

Trac available at SourceForge
-----------------------------

I was just going to post the news that Sourceforge is now hosting
Trac (opt-in), which this community has considered at various times.

Trac is a definite upgrade for subversion use, and could allow us to
unifiy the disparate wikis, etc.

Also, Trac has a usable but imperfect git plugin, so we might be able to
make a major leap forward without incurring the overhead of a move to a
new host.

http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/sitedocs/wiki/Hosted%20Apps
Jeff