Let's move the SVK discussion to the mailing list. Admittedly I
haven't used SVK myself, so maybe Kevin can comment on the practical
aspects.
The idea is that the students initially will only have read access to
the master repository at Apache. This follows a normal pattern of
working with new open source contributors - before write access is
granted (i.e. a person becomes a project committer), (s)he needs to
build some "karma" within the project community. Until then all the
contributions are accepted as patches.
Yes, patch is a text file in a standard format generated by the unix
"diff -u" command (and can be applied using unix "patch" command).
Subversion, CVS, Eclipse and many other tools support this format (in
Eclipse you can both generate and apply standard patches).
The idea of a local repository was proposed to help with SoC work
because you can actually generate a patch between two different local
revisions. So you can submit any number of incremental patches to
your mentor without having to wait until the earlier patches are
reviewed and committed to the master repo.
Again, I don't know if SVK offers benefits compared to Subversion in
synchronizing your work with master Subversion instance (I guess I
have to try it myself). Kevin, do you have any practical hints on
using SVK in this scenario?
Andrus
On May 26, 2006, at 1:44 AM, Marcel wrote:
> Andrus,
>
> I'm a little unsure about the relationship between Jira and an SVK
> repository.
>
> From the thread, I take it that using SVK would help because 1) I
> would then be working in a source control system, with all the
> associated benefits and 2) I could submit patches much more easily.
> The first part I understand; however with the second, does a patch
> come in a standard format, extractable from SVK?
>
> If that is the case, I'm happy to work that way, but if it possible
> without too much trouble I would prefer to have a sub-branch on a
> remote repository - even if it is a separate place from where my
> code goes after review through JIRA - as that would protect me from
> local failures (a big part of benefit (1)). Additionally, it would
> be a better fit with the 'open development' model as you guys have
> been discussing.
>
> Marcel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri May 26 2006 - 11:12:01 EDT