Bertrand, the problem is not about tooling. Is about the things we plan to do. The revision and transformation of the core at flex. If there's a development model based on SVN chaos, nobody will spend an hour to make it happen.
This my unweight opinion as a community member. 2012/8/15 Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> > Hi, > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > ...We’re just past the halfway mark (and some folks who voted in the > poll have not yet voted) > > but if I culled the votes properly (see below), there is a significant > difference of opinion > > between the PPMC and the community... > > This is about which tools the committers use (and might have to > partially support in case of Git, for now) so I wouldn't give much > weight to the community's opinion in this particular case. Those who > do the work decide IMO. > > From the community point of view, one big advantage of github IMO is > that it makes "drive-by contributions" easier, as you don't need to > subscribe to anything to create a pull request - but it's totally > possible for Flex committers to commit the occasional pull requests > that come in against the existing mirrors listed at > http://git.apache.org/ - and if/when those become too frequent, that > would be the time to revisit the tooling. > > -Bertrand > -- Carlos Rovira Director de Tecnología M: +34 607 22 60 05 F: +34 912 35 57 77 <http://www.codeoscopic.com> CODEOSCOPIC S.A. <http://www.codeoscopic.com> Avd. del General Perón, 32 Planta 10, Puertas P-Q 28020 Madrid
