Re: Maintenance of the Hurd parts in glibc (was: about GNU Hurd)

[Michael Casadevall]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I also like mercurial, although I'm not picky (I used monotone for quite a
long time, but anything is a major improvement over CVS). Savannah offers
CVS, git, and arch. arch and git are both decentralized, altough I find
arch very difficult to use.

Anyway, I've been tracking the CVS repo in git, and incrementaly upgrading
every once in awhile, complete will the CVS history and such. I personally
think using git is the best option, arch itself is not wel maintained, CVS
... well, I could go on for a few hours about this, and subversion itself
isn't available for Hurd at the moment (since libapr fails its test
suite).

I realize no matter what we do, people are going to be upset, but its
hurting the project as a whole staying on CVS. Linux and quite a few of
GNU projects (like coreutils) use git. If we REALLY wanted/needed
Subversion server, it could be hosted off Savannah, although we'd need
someone to maintain a server or something.

As for libc still using CVS, I don't know enough about them to say why 
they still are, but it seems to be more of an expection then a rule; most 
projects have, or are planning to migrate from CVS.

Anyway, as a general comprise, why don't we simply move to SVN (while not 
actively stated, Savannah does host Subversion repos, it needs to be 
turned on in the project preferences by a project admin; most DVCS 
can work with a subversion backend (the major expection being monotone, 
and mercural; git, bzr, and svk can use subversion as a backend)  and the 
learning curve of going from cvs to svn is learning to type svn instead of cvs :-)
Michael

 On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, 
Michael Banck wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 06:49:12PM +0200, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> > Maybe it would help to lower entry barriers for the project. A
> > distributed version control helps technically.
>
> What I think is most important is that people can easily locally
> branch/merge the master (CVS) repository with their favourite DVCS, be
> it git, bzr, darcs or mercurial.
>
> I understand this is much easier with subversion than cvs (I know people
> who transparently use git-over-svn when maintaining Debian packages at
> svn.debian.org, the only strange thing you see is the "Signed-off-by"
> notice), and apparently it's similarly easy with bzr; dunno about darcs
> and mercurial.
>
> As Savannah does not provide subversion, we are stuck with cvs for the
> time being, but it should also be possible here, albeit with a bit more
> pain I guess.
>
> A DVCS really makes most sense when you have loads of contributors and
> loads of branches (like Linux, X.org, gcc); we'd probably very quickly
> have more `first-level repositories' than actual users...
>
> And on another (personal) note, as long as glibc can apparently be
> maintained in CVS, it's sort of presumptious to think the Hurd needs
> something better...
>
> Adding a git repository mirroring the (master) CVS repository at
> savannah would be cool I guess, but I am not sure switching over to git at
> this point has any big advantages compared to the (also present)
> drawbacks.
>
> > Maybe we could mirror Hurd's CVS to some DVCS and see if it helps.
> > I've already tailored it to Mercurial, if someone is interested:
> >
> > http://arcanes.fr.eu.org/~pierre/2007/07/hurd/
>
> That's awesome (really!); are you keeping it up-to-date, or is this a
> one-time shot?
>
> We should collect that (and possibily other DVCS mirrors) at least at
> the wiki or maybe even http://hurd.gnu.org (if this is going to be a
> somewhat permanent service).
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-hurd mailing list
> Bug-hurd@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU)

iD8DBQFGp/U+V/FBeJ6jsZQRAmMuAJ9o0ErvHjYlqUns/OSkq24mpVYJIwCbB+XQ
zxGxTo+Y9QUn10401YRlufk=
=R0TG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----