Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:58:11
Message-Id: 20120531205714.GA25021@linux1
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 08:26:58PM +0000, Duncan wrote:
2 > William Hubbs posted on Thu, 31 May 2012 14:54:50 -0500 as excerpted:
3 >
4 > I don't know what's going to happen to all the overlays with the main
5 > tree switch to git, but won't that break various "overlay first"
6 > policies, say for the kde overlay?
7 >
8 > Of course, if all the official overlays are converted to git branches of
9 > the main tree... but won't they still require rebasing as they've already
10 > been pushed? (This assumes your workaround idea doesn't work. If it
11 > does, great!)
12
13 Overlays aren't really part of this discussion; those are independent
14 trees which we have no control over, so commiting changes from overlays
15 to the main tree is the responsibility of the overlay maintainers.
16
17 William

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>