List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
 and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" .
There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
access to the portage tree.
"Clean cut" turns of cvs access on a given and announced timestamp,
rsync-generation/updates is suspended (no input -> no changes), some
magic scripts prepare the git repo (according to , some hours
duration) and we all checkout the tree (might be some funny massive load).
"testing git-cvsserver" proses "Clean cut" with the additional ability
to continue using cvs update/commit, - in best case - on the old
checkout w/o alteration on the developers side.
"Clean cut" forces us to clean up out dirty checkouts (I have some
added directories, added ebuilds i hesitated to `repoman commit`).
Plus we have to alter all our hot-wired portage mangling scripts from
cvs'ish to git'ish (I use my read/write checkout as portage tree (cvs
checkout + egencache for checkout) and have an automated google-chrome
bump script). But this can be accomplished on a per developer basis,
and slackers don't stall the process.
"testing git-cvsserver" forces us all to test these cvs'ish scripts
and behaviours against a git-cvsserver and report.
We all know that this test-runs will never happen, stalling this bug
Plus infra/"subset of devs marshalling the migration" get stuck
between fixing git issues and git-cvsserver.
*if you still read this* *wow*
Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and remove
this bug from the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git".
My lengthy 2 cents.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----