On 24/01/12 08:22, Dave Taht wrote: > My principal critique of this workflow is that I tend to view svn as part > of the problem to a large extent. If I do a patch in my own (git) tree > to test with, I invariably have to rebase that tree when it comes down > from svn. > > as I am frequently offline, not being able to do a 'svn log' is the > second deal-killer for me, for svn usage.
I also see svn as part of the problem. I think a move towards the linux-kernel development model would be a great benefit. Using git would allow users to make many small fixes in their own tree and send single a pull request for fixes to x,y and z to a member of the patch review team for ACK or NAK who can then commit to master. Hopefully this will result in fewer stray patches. The original user will then show up in git blame and will make tracing errors far easier. Currently, unless you have commit rights, everything comes from one of the few core developers and you have to manually look up the changeset to figure out who is responsible for it. Jon _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
