<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Jul 25, 2011, at 3:22 PM, Jason Kim wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 9:54 AM, FlyLanguage<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:flylanguage@gmail.com">flylanguage@gmail.com</a>></span><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; ">Lot of good points.<br><div class="im"><br>> Yep, switching to git would require a lot of work on the project<br>> maintainers' side. Commit hooks, setting up repositories, rewording<br>> policies in terms of the commands of the new tools, and that only to<br></div>> regain the status the project already has - [...]<br><br>All of which could be done on a mirror, with pushes to svn during the<br>transition. Once it can be treated as the "official mainline", turn off<br>svn. If it turn out ugly, keep svn.<br><div><div></div><div class="h5"></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Forcing transitioning to git makes no sense for a lot of us - for example, we have lots of scripts that depend on svn revision numbers - all those could be redone for git, but who wants to do work that they don't have to? What "problem" is it solving?</div><div><br></div><div>Besides, the git-svn readonly bridge is a great solution for those who want to use git - While I agree that dvcs is better (I use mercurial AND git internally), I just don't see the rationale for forcing those who have adopted svn to their workflow to go through a disruptive switch.</div></span></blockquote><br></div><div>Great point. A potential conversion to git should be motivated by its benefits - assuming no development policy change - and that benefit needs to be greater than the various costs of conversion.</div><div><br></div><div>-Chris</div></body></html>