[mapserver-dev] move to github ?

Howard Butler hobu.inc at gmail.com
Tue Mar 20 11:41:48 PDT 2012

Speaking as the last proponent of moving our revision control system from one tool to another...

* I have moved all of my projects to github (PDAL, libLAS, libspatialindex, Rtree). I pay for private hosting on github for other project work.
* It's easy to use git like we use subversion, except when you don't want to. Not the other way.
* OSGeo can provide git but it's not really used right now http://git.osgeo.org/
* The thing that makes github great is not simply git. It's the pull requests.  It's ticket system is about par with Trac for most things. Searching is better than Trac, and it's net/net way more responsive. Bugzilla fanboys will still hate it :)
* A movement from svn+trac -> github for MapServer must preserve the ticket and changeset history that's been built up. This would be a ton of work for someone.
* Is github the next Sourceforge?
* As Thomas has said, I would not go back to trac+svn.

Those wanting to move to github would have to demonstrate ingesting trac -> github as a bare minimum starting point, I think.  I did CVS/Bugzilla -> Trac+svn, and I'm not volunteering for this generation's revision control churn :)


On Mar 20, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

> Thanks Thomas for pointing us all those interesting points.
> For my part, I totally agree with the move and it's clear to me that we'll have to do it a day anyway. I'm still not convinced about github though. I think we should take a closer look at rhodecode (as pointed by Angelos).
> Thanks,
> Alan
> On 12-03-20 01:23 PM, thomas bonfort wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 17:32, Lime, Steve D (DNR)
>> <Steve.Lime at state.mn.us>  wrote:
>>> I'm kind of in the same boat as Frank and am not up on the differences and/or benefits of one versus the other. Seems like that's a worthy discussion...
>> I'll try to give some points which are the most important to me. I'm
>> far from knowing git well enough to list all of them so if others want
>>  to chime in please do.
>> git alone (without github):
>> - you get the whole project history, without needing to go online
>> - offline commits mean you can much more easily create revision points
>> when you're on the road and are working on multiple tasks. I can't
>> count the number of experimental patches I have thrown away because I
>> needed to fall back to a clean trunk when fixing an urgent ticket.
>> - the workflow is somewhat changed: you create a branch (no need to be
>> online) as soon as you start working on a new feature, or on fixing a
>> given ticket. Switching from one branch to another is done instantly,
>> which means you can work on parallel tasks very easily, without
>> risking that your changes interfere with one another. three way merges
>> make merging code from one branch into another much less painfull than
>> with svn+patch
>> - all this means that we also don't have to go through the
>> feature-freeze where all development is halted in trunk while we
>> release. You just merge back the fixes of the release branch back into
>> the trunk (called master by convention).
>> github:
>> - pull requests (along with easy branches) make applying user-supplied
>> fixes much easier.
>> - code commenting (add comments directly aside a specific line in a
>> changeset) makes collaboration much lighter than having to create a
>> full email recapitulating the context.
>> - online code edition, typically for quickly committing a typo fix.
>> Aside from that, all the people I know who have switched from trac+svn
>> to git+github would never move back to the old solution. The git
>> learning curve is quite steep (although using it the same as svn isn't
>> very challenging) but I think very well worth it. Of course, that is
>> provided you hack frequently on the code.
>> --
>> thomas
>>> Steve
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of Frank Warmerdam [warmerdam at pobox.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 9:39 PM
>>> To: thomas bonfort
>>> Cc: MapServer Dev Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [mapserver-dev] move to github ?
>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:52 AM, thomas bonfort
>>> <thomas.bonfort at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>> any other options? what are your thoughts?
>>> Thomas,
>>> Since you ask - I'm happy with the way things are!
>>> Best regards,
>>> --
>>> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
>>> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
>>> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
>>> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
> -- 
> Alan Boudreault
> http://www.mapgears.com/
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

More information about the mapserver-dev mailing list