git, future directions - ESOE Development

Message from discussion git, future directions

Bradley Beddoes

More options Mar 5, 11:49 am

From: Bradley Beddoes <bedd...@intient.com>

Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 10:49:15 +1000

Local: Thurs, Mar 5 2009 11:49 am

Subject: Re: [esoe-dev] Re: git, future directions

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

On 01/03/2009, at 5:24 PM, Shaun Mangelsdorf wrote:

> No argument from me. The only thing I would be concerned about is
> making sure that the tooling supports it. The project needs continuous
> integration and a repository inspector, and ideally an issue tracker
> linked into both of these. I have used the Atlassian tool set to do
> this in the past which works well, but I don't think they are
> supporting git yet… yep just checked and they still aren't though they
> plan to.

> Although I see your point, I think we can find suitable substitutes
> that (while not as tightly integrated as the Atlassian suite) will
> give us what we need and support git natively.

Hudson is a good example here. Where possible I'd like to stick to
other open source solutions to support the project. We've been using
Hudson in the past with great success and flexibility.

> This might warrant some further investigation. If it turns out that
> git is too widely unsupported, we may need to stay with subversion.

Hudson at least seems to have pretty decent GIT support
http://wiki.hudson-ci.org/display/HUDSON/Git+Plugin

> It makes sense to me to move this project to Codehaus or even Apache.
> Although Apache is quite strict on the projects they host so Codehaus
> might be a better choice. They have all the tools and admin interfaces
> to manage them, not to mention free bandwidth. It also adds a certain
> aspect of credibility to the project by having it hosted by a well
> known hoster of open source projects. Plus, it allows the developers
> to focus on developing rather than installing and configuring
> software.

> We'd have to look into the copyright issues surrounding the
> ownership of the code. Apache for one requires that the code be
> owned by the foundation.

> Not sure what Codehaus' barrier to entry is like, but on first
> inspection they seem to have the Atlassian suite set up, so it's
> worth considering what we want to do for SCM before we decide where
> to host the project long term.

I've had at length discussions with the Apache folks before we got
semi close but there are some major blockers that we couldn't get
around, particularly in the C++ side.

I for one am actually happier with the project standing on its own,
the less we need to deal with other groups political processes the
more time we spend on the many various facets that make up ESOE.

> I am not a hardcore git user so I may not have seen the light yet, but
> I would rather stick with svn because of the support for it from
> FishEye and Bamboo for the time being. Individual developers can
> always use git+svn locally to get _some_ of the features.

I'd really rather one or the other and not be trying to support some
hybrid. Common sense would have to tell you that eventually that kind
of arrangement will come unstuck and cause headaches.

> git+svn would be an option if we're stuck and can't find the
> necessary tools, but I think a move to git would be good for the
> project as a whole. Git's branching and merging features (among
> others) are second to none in my experience; and there are a great
> deal of features which will benefit a project under distributed
> development, as ESOE is and will undoubtedly continue to be.

Totally agree.

Bradley

> Keen to hear more thoughts on this.

> Shaun

Bradley Beddoes
Lead Software Architect
Intient Pty Ltd

http://www.intient.com
Twitter: @bradleybeddoes

Reply to author Forward