Ralph Goers wrote:
I've glanced at git but never used it. I've read that it is more complicated than SVN because it works very differently. I have enough interest in logback that I'd probably do what it takes to get access to the source but I imagine there are others who wouldn't if setting it up is more difficult than just installing a bit of software.
My impression is that some time in the future, git will be added to the list of software that any os developer will be required to know, similar to CVS or SVN today. Time will tell. Anyway, for "legacy developers", we could continue to export into an SVN repo.
I'm not 100% sure what the real benefit would be. Ultimately the code needs to be committed back to logback. How would using git make it easier? Would we be able to commit somewhere that would allow you to commit stuff to the "real" repository?
That's an excellent question. If git is better at merging and creating forks is easy, Alice could fork logback, work on our branch for a few days or even a few weeks, committing many changes to her forked repository. She could later publicize her repository for others to study. If her changes are deemed interesting, they could be imported back into the "official" logback repository. This is similar to the workflow that would take place on the SVN, except that Alice would not be able to commit her changes locally and nor would she be able to publicize her repository. She would be constrained to patch files. The difference is admittedly subtle but subtle differences sometimes can make all the difference (but most often they don't).
Ralph -- Ceki Gülcü Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java. http://logback.qos.ch