Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions regarding the new portage API (savior branch)
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 05:43:59
Message-Id: 20060303054245.GF31188@nightcrawler.had1.or.comcast.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions regarding the new portage API (savior branch) by Marius Mauch
1 On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:44:58PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
2 > Brian Harring wrote:
3 > >On 2/28/06, *Michael Schilling* <gentoo@×××××××.de
4 > ><mailto:gentoo@×××××××.de>> wrote:
5 > >
6 > > - Is one of these svn-web-repository up to date?
7 > > * http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/branches/savior/
8 > > * http://mzz.mine.nu/bzr/savior-svn/portage/
9 > > <http://mzz.mine.nu/bzr/savior-svn/portage/>
10 > >
11 > >
12 > >I switched over to bzr about 2 months back; svn doesn't allow for
13 > >offline committing, nor does gentoo's vcs allow for anon*... bzr
14 > >natively allows for those capabilities, so that's what I'm using. :)
15 > >
16 > >http://gentooexperimental.org/~ferringb/bzr/saviour
17 > >Is where I'll be updating the code for at least the near future.
18 > >
19 >
20 > Does that mean we should drop the SVN branch?
21
22 Realistically... I have no intention of going back to SVN, haven't for
23 a while. Can't even access the darn thing now a days anyways, thus
24 the branch has fallen further in usefulness to me :)
25
26 If y'all want to mirror it, might I suggest poking marienz for his
27 tailorization knowledge? Afaik, he had a bzr->svn push working, or at
28 least has investigated it.
29
30 ~harring

Replies