Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union + suggestion for global dev conference (at bottom, if you want to skip)
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 02:00:56
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union + suggestion for global dev conference (at bottom, if you want to skip) by Stuart Herbert
1 Stuart Herbert wrote:
3 >> __Problem: CVS__
4 >>
5 >> CVS is one of the worst application ever created.
6 >
7 > Hear, hear.
8 >
9 > I'd like to see a move to Subversion made a priority for 2006. If there
10 > are problems with Subversion's performance with our tree, engage with
11 > its authors to obtain improvements. But get it done.
13 /me puts on his admin hat
15 Its going to be a bitch to switch to anything and it would be great to
16 have some quantitative (unbiased) proof that such a move will add enough
17 benefit for developers and Gentoo to be worth it. Truthfully, I don't
18 know much about the other VC's out there (git, subversion, etc). But
19 from what I do know, I would say that subversion has the best bet to be
20 our preferred replacement.
22 /me puts on his dev hat
24 From what I've heard, subversion offers the best features and
25 flexibility of the other VC's out there. Granted git has some nice
26 features too, but I'd have to evaluate what we really need.
28 /me puts on his neutral hat
30 Subversion would be the best bet now because of viewcvs (now viewvc)
31 support for it. Changing version control software is going to take a
32 *bunch* of work. Things I can think of off the top of my head that will
33 need work will be:
35 * repoman support
36 * portage regen tools on the master mirror
37 * developer documentation
38 * developer training (amazing concept!)
39 * massive testing of all issues
41 Here's an idea I had tonight. Since we're going to be doing the Google
42 SoC this summer, perhaps a great project would be having someone work on
43 this migration (or at least do an unbiased test implementation). I'd be
44 willing to provide an infra server for testing/development. I don't see
45 much problem at least trying to work out all the details. I don't think
46 infra will go with any change unless there is a clear, detailed
47 migration plan with proper back-out plans also. The tree is the most
48 important part of our distribution and I'm not going to let such a
49 migration go by without proper planning and testing. After the test
50 implementation is done and has been fully tested, perhaps the council
51 could make the final decision if infra is happy with the
52 implementation/migration details.
54 I'm sure there are going to be unseen issues we won't know about until
55 we try a migration. It would be neat if I could provide a developer
56 restricted rsync module on the test box so that they can actually try
57 using their systems on there.
59 Anyways, I'd just thought I'd give my input since its going to need to
60 go through us eventually :). If people like the idea of having a SoC
61 project for this, let me know and I'll have user-rel add that to the list.
63 Cheers-
65 --
66 Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
67 Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager
69 ---
70 GPG Public Key: <>
71 Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742
73 ramereth/


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature