[vlc-devel] Switching to git

Pierre d'Herbemont pdherbemont at free.fr
Sat Feb 16 21:06:35 CET 2008

On Feb 16, 2008, at 8:49 PM, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:

> Le Saturday 16 February 2008 21:28:30 Pierre d'Herbemont, vous avez  
> écrit :
>> Basically we have more or less everything ready, that includes Trac:
>> http://jones.videolan.org:8000/vlc-git/
>> http://git.videolan.org/
> IMHO, first, the tree should be re-imported through git-svn with a
> proper --authors-file. I simply don't like to be called
> <courmisch at 087cc15d-e3d4-0310-b314-ee4ba9120b5d>.

Nice point. I'll work on that...

> Another thing that I am confused about is, git push, both technically,
> and "politically". As much as I prefer git to SVN, I respectfully  
> completely
> disagree with Linus Torvalds' stated opinion that git removes the  
> "commit bit
> politics". There are two ways to "commit" with git. Either we have  
> git push,
> i.e. commit bit, all like SVN and CVS. Or we have an omnipotent  
> maintainer to
> merge patches to the "official" tree as with the Linux kernel.

I think we should retain the git push centralized approach for now,  
wouldn't we?

(About the commit politics, the discussion is about controversial  
patches that you are free to publish in a branch while retaining  
everything else from the official tree, wipping out political  
discussions. So forking is cheap. But unforking is also cheap as git  
would nicely pull back the controversial patches back in the official  

In other words maintaining unaccepted patches is way easier.

I may be completly mistaken as I didn't read the what Linus was  
saying, so take that as my 2 cents.)

> (And third, we'll need to write a GIT for SVN users howto, but  
> that's obvious)

We already have http://wiki.videolan.org/Git but obviously it isn't  
nice enough.


More information about the vlc-devel mailing list