Feature #14551


What's missing to switch to Git instead of using Subversion?

Added by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) about 3 years ago. Updated about 3 years ago.

Target version:


I know migrating to Git get asked at least every year at RubyKaigi, and this should be a motivation to change.
#14470 is one example making me wonder why we still use such an ancient technology like Subversion.

To be clear, this does NOT mean changing the issue tracker, that is orthogonal.

1) I have heard some scripts might stop working if we switch to Git and nobody knows a list of those scripts.
But, can't we just switch and adapt them as needed?
As long as this is not close to a release, I expect there will be a couple days where scripts are fixed
but after that pretty much everything should work just as well as before.

2) Are there Ruby committers still using Subversion? I would guess the vast majority is using Git.
Could they use maybe if they want to keep using Subversion?

3) Does Redmine lack Git support? Is there an estimation of how much work it would take to add it?

4) Something else?

Advantages include:

  • External people can contribute more directly with Pull Requests on GitHub, if they want (which is what most external contributors do). There is no need to squash their commits or manually checkout their branch, which delays integration significantly and loses the original author in the process (only mentioned as text while they really deserve to be marked as having contributed to Ruby).
  • We use a non-obsolete technology and don't look like a language from the past.
  • The setup for contributing to Ruby becomes much simpler (git clone, not a mix of SVN/git all the time)
  • Many others advantages but listing them is not the point of this issue.

Related issues

Related to Ruby master - Feature #11741: Migrate Ruby to Git from SubversionRejectedActions
Related to Ruby master - Misc #10547: How to move the ruby project to gitRejectedhsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA)Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF