Re: [Opensg-users] github [was down the drain]

[Gerrit V. <vo...@vo...>]

Hi,

On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 10:38 +0100, Marcus Lindblom wrote: 
> On 2010-01-12 20:40, Dominik Rau wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Am 12.01.2010 15:17, schrieb Marcus Lindblom:
> 
> >
> > In my opinion, getting the web sites back online / getting rid of the
> > old ones and providing 2.0 daily builds, at least for Windows is
> > extremely important and I'd be happy to help with "man hours" and/or
> > material. However, if there already is some infrastructure (AFAIR for
> > 1.x there were several build bot machines), it would be pointless to do
> > all the work again.
> 
> On the core-list, there are fixes underway. The computer running 
> opensg.org was located (very dusty, noisy fan, won't survive reboot) and 
> things are being moved to fresh hardware.
> 
> So I think we're heading in the right direction. :)
> 
> However, I'd love to see github.com being used instead of SVN, as it's 
> much easier to maintain own changes, submit fixes for bugs and for 
> core-devs to pull & integrate patches.

I already mirror the current svn master on github because of the
ongoing website problems. Currently I do that manually but I could
automate it in the future (e.g. cron scripted once an hour or so).

I'm still a little hesitant to move everything to git as you can
do to many weird things to a tree. For now a linear system like
svn seems safer. For maintaining own changes it should actually
make no difference (git fetch vs. git-svn fetch). 

The pulling and integrating patches part I can see. Could we start
with a double system where I provide and update a github mirror which
people can clone and we (I) can pull & integrate patches from.


As you can merge multiple git source trees into one from my
side this should not be a problem. I push both the svn and
git repositories from the same master git tree on my system.

kind regards
  gerrit