Ruby trunk

ruby-talk
1

Hey guys,

I have a question: why is the official ruby repo still on SVN and not
on Git?
I think git provides much better collaborative options. What about
just putting on GitHub so everyone can fork from there etc., and git
has proven better in about everything ruby-related, so why not Ruby
itself?

Greets

2

I think that pretty much says it all.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonas Schneider [mailto:js.sokrates@googlemail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 3:00 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Ruby trunk

Hey guys,

I have a question: why is the official ruby repo still on SVN and not
on Git?
I think git provides much better collaborative options. What about
just putting on GitHub so everyone can fork from there etc., and git
has proven better in about everything ruby-related, so why not Ruby
itself?

Greets

3

There was a very long discussion about this over on the ruby-core mailing list not too long ago (http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/25290\). Essentially, the decision not to move was made because:

-- core team is busy fixing issues and doesn't need the cognitive load of learning a new VCS

-- certain Subversion specific tools used by the core team would need to be rewritten

-- enough of the core team is still on Windows and git support on Windows is still shaky enough that these members don't feel comfortable with the move

-- While Git has advantages over Subversion (distributed, easy branching), they aren't great enough to overcome the above hurdles.

-- The git-svn bridge has progressed significantly enough to make it mostly irrelevant whether the "true" central repository is Git or Subversion.

-- The git mirror at http://github.com/shyouhei/ruby is sufficient (try it, you'll like it!)

-- As described at http://wiki.github.com/shyouhei/ruby/noncommitterhowto, it really doesn't matter anyway if you're not a committer, because you'd have to get any patches approved and submitted by a committer regardless. Whether that's a git-pull request or a git-format-patch e-mail shouldn't really matter.

Finally, as much as I like the easy forking that git and GitHub allow, perhaps try looking at the numerous Ruby forks that already exist (some of which *do* use git as their central repository) and maybe contribute to one of them instead of making your own fork:

Rubinius: http://github.com/evanphx/rubinius
JRuby: GitHub - jruby/jruby: JRuby, an implementation of Ruby on the JVM
MacRuby: http://www.macruby.org/source.html
IronRuby: http://www.ironruby.net/

Cheers,

Josh

···

On Oct 12, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Jonas Schneider wrote:

Hey guys,

I have a question: why is the official ruby repo still on SVN and not
on Git?
I think git provides much better collaborative options. What about
just putting on GitHub so everyone can fork from there etc., and git
has proven better in about everything ruby-related, so why not Ruby
itself?

4

Walton Hoops wrote:

GitHub - shyouhei/ruby: UNOFFICIAL: please use http://github.com/ruby/ruby instead.

I think that pretty much says it all.

http://github.com/rubyspec/matzruby

Is another good one.
-r

···

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.

5

Don't use RubySpec's mirror if you're planning on submitting patches
back to trunk. Shyouhei is a committer, and will actually respond to
(or at least consider) pull requests.

~ j.

···

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@gmail.com> wrote:

Walton Hoops wrote:

GitHub - shyouhei/ruby: UNOFFICIAL: please use http://github.com/ruby/ruby instead.

I think that pretty much says it all.

http://github.com/rubyspec/matzruby