Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
Subject: Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 19:13:42 +0000
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:48:29PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote:
> > 1.
> > Discussion on merge policy. Originally I thought we would disallow merge
> > commits, so that we would get a cleaner history. However, it turns out that if
> > the repo ends up being pushed to different places with slightly different
> > histories, merges are absolutely going to be required to prevent somebody from
> > having to rebase at least one of their sets of commits that are already pushed.
> Not sure I'm following, but I will be the first to admit that I'm a
> git novice.  Would this be aided by a convention, like only committing
> to master on the gentoo official repository, and any on-the-side work
> on places like github/etc stays in branches?  Those repositories would
> just keep getting fed commits on master from the official repository.
Ok, let me try and reword my statement.

- You have a commit, that you want to put into the Gentoo tree.
- You have already pushed it to your github, signed
- It needs to be merged/rebased so that it applies on the Gentoo tree.
- If you force it to be a rebase so it applies on the tip, then you may
  have changed the history of your github tree, and broken any further
  forks.
- If you permit a merge instead, nobody gets broken.

> > 2.
> > Git-SVN breakage. Why does this matter you're wondering?
> > We need the newer Git for the commit signing, but it comes with a
> > price, the git-svn binary has some major failures with SVN 1.7.
> > Git since 1.7.8 has been broken this way.
> To clarify - these won't be issues for gentoo per se, but there is a
> sense that we can't stabilize the latest git because it will break it
> for people using git-svn on non-gentoo work?
As the Git maintainer, I will not keyword it for anybody until I know
it's not going to lose/corrupt data, regardless of what they are using
it for.

I don't think there are many SVN repos left in Gentoo that haven't
converted to using Git directly, so it's probably not a problem from
that side.

> If that is the case, what is our sense of how important this feature
> even is to gentoo developers?  They're the only ones who really have
> to have the latest git to commit to the official tree.
You'd be excluding me entirely, I need to use git-svn for other work
projects, and emerging between two different versions of git would be
very annoying (I switch constantly between the sides of work as they
overlap).

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail     : robbat2@g.o
GnuPG FP   : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85


Replies:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- William Hubbs
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Rich Freeman
References:
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Alexey Shvetsov
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Rich Freeman
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Duncan
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Dirkjan Ochtman
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Rich Freeman
Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Duncan
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Dirkjan Ochtman
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Robin H. Johnson
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
-- Rich Freeman
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Next by thread:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Previous by date:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Next by date:
Re: Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.