-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/07/10 00:17, Carsten Krüger wrote: > Hello, > >> So it was considered better if a new SVN branch for the beta2.2 would be >> created, branched out from r5701 (the latest SVN change). > > Why didn't James switch to git, too? > Using svn & git in parallel isn't effective and causes such problems. > And as far as I know is git a complete superset of subversion. >
Just to bring in a little bit of history. When I volunteered to maintain the -testing tree, I saw that git would be more efficient and easier to work with than SVN. I have no intention of forcing James or OpenVPN Technologies, Inc. to move over to git. But I personally do like git more than SVN, based on experiences with performance and work efficiency, and I do agree to your statement about git being a superset of SVN. I have used both over time, but when I learned git, using git-svn became my preferred working method. Having that said, I do know James is (over?)loaded with a lot of work. So if he wants to move over to git for beta2.2, that must come as a wish from his side. Changing something as important as an SCM/VCS when you have your plate more than full enough with tasks, is no fun - then you just want as few changes as possible to things which do work for you. If James wants to move over to git, I will do my best to support James. And if not, we need to live with some of these challenges a SVN/git integration gives us. We just need to figure out "which path to take" among the different possibilities we're given. Kind regards, David Sommerseth -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwvZAkACgkQDC186MBRfrqc0wCeIP7jQRGPlB1yr5eZqzAndwbx EUUAoI3PbI6ZzBvvAtp6A3jYWYifxHg+ =oRRq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
