Re: [Cvs-dev] cvs features for gnu savannah

[Conrad T. Pino]

> From: Cvs-dev On Behalf Of Thorsten Glaser

> > I volunteer to archive CVS top-of-tree into separate branch and then 
> > revert specific ChangeLog commits to bring CVS top-of-tree into a 
> > state ready to accept new commits for a future 1.12.14 release.
> 
> Please *DON'T* rewrite history like this. We can find other 
> solutions. such as developing 1.12.14 and up on a branch.

CVS Project history is propose where appropriate and await discussion.
Example:

http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/cvs-dev/2016-11/msg00009.html

http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/cvs-dev/2016-12/msg00009.html

My intention is fully preserving history and methods are up for discussion.

I'm operating upon the beliefs that:

1) At this time everyone seems to agree CVS top-of-tree (MAIN) is
unacceptable having incomplete changes no one wants to complete; GPLV3+ in
particular.

2) Branching MAIN to new branch preserves MAIN state on new branch and MAIN
history remains as was.

3) The ChangeLog enumerates feature changes making selective roll back
possible.

4) Roll back commits, if any, add to MAIN commit history.

If done, (A) prior MAIN state and history are preserved and (B) MAIN is
usable for feature development once again.

I await a consensus.

> > I volunteer to merge 1.12.13-MirDebian-11 release changes into CVS 
> > top-of-tree if publicly accessible and as requested.
> 
> I don't have individual patches right now, I would need to 
> craft them from the huge tree delta. and then, I can just commit them.

Consider delegating "craft them from the huge tree delta" if source is
publicly accessible. Such delegations are implied in "I volunteer ..."

However only you can decide which delegations are effective to your work
process.

> > I believe I can retrofit bug fixes made to 1.12 into 1.11 branch.
> 
> That would likely be welcome.

I suggest 1.12 commits by feature or bug fix rather than large bundles.
Small focused commits facilitate porting between branches.

> One more thing?-?someone suggested merging some unnamed fixes 
> from 1.11 into 1.12; if you can point them out to me for 
> forward- porting, that would be welcome (I don't know what's 
> in 1.11 and still needed in 1.12).

Mechanical ChangeLog comparison between revisions will help.
I can review respective branch ChangeLog over the weekend.

Prior discussions suggest these branches are in play:

cvs1-11-x-branch                          (branch: 1.692.2)
cvs1-11-23                              (revision: 1.692.2.265)
cvs1-11-x-branch-last-merge             (revision: 1.692.2.268)

cvs1-12-13-win-fix                        (branch: 1.1262.2)
cvs1-12-13a                             (revision: 1.1262.2.1)

cvs1-12-13                              (revision: 1.1262)
top-of-tree                             (revision: 1.1379)

I'll work the above list.  Additions are welcome.

Best regards,
Conrad T. Pino