Hi,
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 11:35:42AM +0200, Eric Noulard wrote:
> 2009/6/3 Frederik Deweerdt <address@hidden>:
> We could but I don't really like the idea of a "master" CVS,
> while most of us will certainly want git or hg or git or hg or ...
> Note that having a "master" git @ Savannah does not exclude the idea
> of having other git synchronized tree elsewhere is order to ensure
> that those servers can sustain the load of our commit rate :-)
> No more seriously having some git/hg tree replica will
> ensure better chance of recovery.
Definitely, the idea of a master CVS comes from the fear of having users
unable to checkout for whatever reason. With CVS sync and still the
main repo and git, we'd get the better of both worlds. I wasn't aware
of savannah having a git-cvsserver, great.
>
> Concerning Savannah outage I have to temper your words.
[...]
They were indeed a bit harsh :-)
Regards,
Frederik