Hi, > I see this as a flawed argument. In SVN I could basically keep a bunch of > code for experiments and patches on my local machine without committing as > long as I want, making it not public. I worked with both (and many other VCS) over many years and that what I've seen happen. Of course as they say your millage may vary.
> The valid point here is that code in GitHub would be outside of the'control' > of ASF. Yep I think that is the main point. > I disagree with this as it will continue to complicate the workflows How does it complicate work flows? Committer commit patches via git, everyone can work either via git or github - that's what everyone wants right? We voted for the gitflow model with cherry picking and working in a develop branch, it's hard to make that more complex :-) The only issues I can see is closing pull requests and I'm sure that's possible, and the fact that the github mirror may lag a little behind the git repository. Thanks, Justin
