On 25/10/12 19:20, Quim Gil wrote:
On 10/25/2012 09:56 AM, Platonides wrote:
People with a svn account should know git is
prefered now
Finding out the old SVN repo is now read-only is a good way for that
target group to learn about the now official
gerrit.mediwiki.org , isn't
it.
My point is that people with write access (the only ones who can find
out the hard way) already know.
See
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?path=%2Ftrunk%2Fextensions&title=…
Applying a bugfix patch (from bugzilla) to SelectCategory on September
5th (r115705). Daniel Kinzler knows perfectly about git. Was it worth
migrating the extension to git? Probably not.
Is it good to have one bug less, even on an almost unmaintained
extension? Yes.
There were also commits to a few extensions in August.
We have enough confusion for contributors with Gerrit
vs GitHub.
Don't use GitHub. It would be possible to do, but that creates confusion
so it's better to pretend it doesn't exist. It should be possible to
contribute to mediawiki-related projects without using GitHub at all.
Removing SVN from the mix helps a bit, or at least
doesn't help getting
things worse.
Is it really hard?
If an extension is in gerrit but not in svn: It has clearly to be
improved in gerrit.
If an extension is in svn but not in gerrit: It could be improved in
svn, but for any serious work on it, you should request it migrated to
gerrit.
If an extension is in svn and in gerrit: it has een migrated to gerrit,
so contribute to it there. In fact, you will find it is already
read-only in svn.
Maybe the most interesting commit to svn in the last months is r115676,
a one-file new extension. «Git makes it hard to work with locally
modified files, so turned it into an extension. Putting on svn because i
just want somewhere to stuff it, and i think there is some
rigamarole with getting a new extension in git. Its
a pretty useless extension, so I'm ok with it being on svn»
If the gerrit process leads people away (svn, GitHub...) then that is a
problem.