| 1 |
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yeah... this is why I was asking about access to infra to test the |
| 3 |
> conversion; so far, I haven't had any replies, though. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
A mock conversion would probably help with creating |
| 7 |
procedures/docs/etc as well. It is nice to say that we're "just going |
| 8 |
to use git" but I think everybody has a slightly different picture of |
| 9 |
how that is going to work. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
If we could set up an "official unofficial" portage tree in git based |
| 12 |
on a one-time migration (maybe refreshing it from time to time) that |
| 13 |
could be a sandbox used to work things out, and it would then be |
| 14 |
replaced with the official tree. When the official migration comes |
| 15 |
along we'd already be experts in doing it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
All we need to do is execute the migration, and just not point the |
| 18 |
rsync generation process at it. Maybe it won't be perfectly right at |
| 19 |
first, and that would basically be the point of doing it. Devs could |
| 20 |
update tools to work against it, and the docs could be written |
| 21 |
alongside. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Rich |
Archives