| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
14.09.14 14:03, Michał Górny написав(ла): |
| 4 |
> Hi, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I'm quite tired of promises and all that perfectionist non-sense which |
| 7 |
> locks us up with CVS for next 10 years of bikeshed. Therefore, I have |
| 8 |
> prepared a plan how to do git migration, and I believe it's doable in |
| 9 |
> less than 2 weeks (plus the testing). Of course, that assumes infra is |
| 10 |
> going to cooperate quickly or someone else is willing to provide the |
| 11 |
> infra for it. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
as always, nice effort, but I foresee lots of bikeshedding in this thread. ) |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> This means we don't have to wait till someone figures out the perfect |
| 17 |
> way of converting the old CVS repository. You don't need that history |
| 18 |
> most of the time, and you can play with CVS to get it if you really do. |
| 19 |
> In any case, we would likely strip the history anyway to get a small |
| 20 |
> repo to work with. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Is it so difficult to convert CVS history? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> The rsync tree |
| 27 |
> -------------- |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> We'd also propagate things to rsync. We'd have to populate it with old |
| 30 |
> ChangeLogs, new ChangeLog entries (autogenerated from git) and thick |
| 31 |
> Manifests. So users won't notice much of a change. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
How will user check the ebuild integrity with thick manifests using rsync? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> The remaining issue is signing of stuff. We could supposedly sign |
| 37 |
> Manifests but IMO it's a waste of resources considered how poor |
| 38 |
> the signing system is for non-git repos. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Again, how will user check the integrity and authenticity if Manifests are unsigned? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Also, it would be a good idea to add automatic signature checking to portage for overlays that use signing (or is it already done?). |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
Jauhien |
Archives