- From: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>
- Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 08:42:30 -0500
- To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: public-qa-dev@w3.org
Hi Dom, Le 9 déc. 2009 à 03:38, Dominique Hazael-Massieux a écrit : > We’ve heard from several groups and individuals that they would like W3C > to host a public decentralized versioning repository for W3C-related > work items, such as editors drafts, test suites, tools and software. I have in the last year had to look at possibly a new versioning system for our company. We didn't switch finally from svn to something else because the ROI was not clear. This said, it helped to create a review of the available platforms. In the realm of opensource distributed versioning tools, there are 3 main options: * bazaar (can be used in a server mode) * git (partial support on windows) * mercurial Wikipedia has a page for [platforms comparison][1] which is super useful. Another [comparison grid][5]. You can also check the individual community and which well known open source projects are using them * bazaar: Ubuntu, GNU Emacs, GNU Mailman, MySQL, Gnash, Squid, GNUpdf and the GNOME bindings for Java. * git: Linux kernel, Perl, GNOME, Samba, X.org Server, Qt, One Laptop per Child (OLPC) core development, VLC, Wine, Ruby on Rails, and the Android mobile platform. * Mercurial: Mozilla, OpenJDK, OpenSolaris, Symbian OS, Python [Bazaar][4] looked very attractive to me. It is possible to have a dual mode with distributed versioning and central server. There is also a notion of [gatekeeper][2]. [Why Switch to Bazaar][6] gives also information. [Patch Queue Manager][3] is a way to manage and handles the merge with bazaar. All that said, I have no real practical reasons for input. People with more experience would be worth listening. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software [2]: http://wiki.bazaar.canonical.com/Workflows#Decentralized%20with%20human%20gatekeeper [3]: https://launchpad.net/pqm [4]: http://bazaar.canonical.com/en/ [5]: http://versioncontrolblog.com/comparison/Bazaar/Git/Mercurial/index.html [6]: http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html # User stories We also created user stories around the versioning system. I tried to adapt them with regards to W3C working reality. ## Roles * open source developer * non techie person who wants to access a project * W3C Team Staff * W3C Member person * sysadmin ## Some Scenarios I removed most of them because they seemed not worth for W3C case. There are certainly some missing. * Developer needs to get a part of the code for starting a project * Developer wants to work offline * Developer wants to work online from home * Developer wants to start a branch for experimental work * Developer needs to read the history log of a project * Developer needs to commit his own code * Developer needs to access the history log a specific file * Developer needs to know the status of his local checkout (diff, to commit or update) * Developer can quickly fix a bug and deploy it * Developer can work on any versions without hurdles. * W3C staff can start a new project very quickly * Non techie person can visualize the advancement of the project (UI) * W3C staff can assign the rights very quickly to a set of developers * Sysadmins can create a new project by "pushing a button" -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 13:42:42 UTC