Re: State of the mercurial mirror

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Rainer Orth]

Thomas,

> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken for months..... and the contact listed there does not answer emails.

unfortunately true, I've asked the same question quite some time ago.

> Can somebody here at least remove those misleading pages..?

... or replace it with hints for converting the svn repo to hg.  I'm
doing this myself for quite some time, and apart from a few caveats, it
works just fine.  From my experience, hg is vastly superior to git,
which is simply a usability nightmare, as Dan Berlin discovered when he
worked on setting up the hg mirror.

> Also, i would volunteer to fix this, and even to maintain the mirror. Is this the right place to ask ? I don't even know if that's something that would be well accepted. Any interest for this ?

It would certainly be good to keep this working and promote it,
especially if this could be a complete conversion of the svn repo, not
trunk only.

	Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Thomas Capricelli <orzel@freehackers.org> writes:

> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken for months..... and the
> contact listed there does not answer emails.
>
> Can somebody here at least remove those misleading pages..?

If there is concensus here to remove this obsolete mirror, we can
remove it instantly.  If there is a volunteer to maintain it, we can
probably let her try too.

- FChE

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Thomas Capricelli]

In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 16:29:12, Rainer Orth ha scritto:
> works just fine.  From my experience, hg is vastly superior to git,
> which is simply a usability nightmare, as Dan Berlin discovered when he
> worked on setting up the hg mirror.

I completely agree, but my point was not to start a war git vs mercurial :-)

> > Also, i would volunteer to fix this, and even to maintain the mirror. Is this the right place to ask ? I don't even know if that's something that would be well accepted. Any interest for this ?
> 
> It would certainly be good to keep this working and promote it,
> especially if this could be a complete conversion of the svn repo, not
> trunk only.

I could try to do this. I've converted several repositories, and created mirrors for several projects too. Most of them private/closed source (i'm working as a consultant). I did the migration svn->mercurial for the project eigen, and it was not possible (or very very hard) to do the same for git at this time, because eigen was part of the very big KDE svn repository. ref:
http://www.freehackers.org/thomas/2009/05/18/feedback-about-converting-eigen2-to-mercurial/

(btw, eigen is also the source of several template-related bug reports for g++, :-)

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Capricelli <orzel@freehackers.org>
http://www.freehackers.org/thomas

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Thomas Capricelli <orzel@freehackers.org> writes:

> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken [...]

Or rather, it has gotten stale.  I started up update process that
should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the present day.  If
that completes in reasonable time, maybe I'll keep it running.  I seem
to recall that the reason it was turned off was because the time neeed
to update the hg repository (via hgpullsvn) was longer than the mean
time between checkins into the svn repository.  If that's true and
unfixable, that's madness.

- FChE

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Thomas Capricelli]

In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 21:13:20, Frank Ch. Eigler ha scritto:
> > The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken [...]
> 
> Or rather, it has gotten stale.  I started up update process that
> should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the present day.  If
> that completes in reasonable time, maybe I'll keep it running.  I seem
> to recall that the reason it was turned off was because the time neeed
> to update the hg repository (via hgpullsvn) was longer than the mean
> time between checkins into the svn repository.  If that's true and
> unfixable, that's madness.


I dont know what hgpullsvn is (a script of yours?). But a typical mirror is pretty fast to sync, especially if both repositories are local (same hard disk or at least same computer). The initial import can take some time, mainly because of svn  (not hg).

I have a local mirror here (only for gcc trunk, and only starting at rev 156000) and a warm sync (just after a sync was done, there's nothing to actually sync, this measures the overhead) takes 0.628u 0.164s 0:07.48

I think 99% of this is spent in network communication between my computer and gcc svn server.

++
Thomas

Re: State of the mercurial mirror

[Thomas Capricelli]

In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 21:13:20, Frank Ch. Eigler ha scritto:
> Or rather, it has gotten stale.  I started up update process that
> should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the present day.  If
> that completes in reasonable time, maybe I'll keep it running.

Ok, it's been several days now, and it seems to work flawlessly, at least from the user point of view. So it's ok with me. Thanks a lot for re-activating it!

If you ever need it, my proposal for help for anything mercurial related is still valid, don't hesitate to ask me. Whether it is about to solve the 'time' problem between update, to provide mirror for branches, or (hey!) repository migration :-)

best regards,
-- 
Thomas Capricelli <orzel@freehackers.org>
http://www.freehackers.org/thomas