From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118385 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2019 20:49:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 118376 invoked by uid 89); 6 Dec 2019 20:49:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=H*M:online X-HELO: mailout11.t-online.de Received: from mailout11.t-online.de (HELO mailout11.t-online.de) (194.25.134.85) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Dec 2019 20:49:14 +0000 Received: from fwd00.aul.t-online.de (fwd00.aul.t-online.de [172.20.26.147]) by mailout11.t-online.de (Postfix) with SMTP id 773634254F44; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 21:49:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from sweetums.local (VsBCzaZUrh5uR3hf2GHGqRw9FCr4j0CKMBu6ILaNw8+Yt96TiPw6ZNEmlDzQk6ggKO@[84.128.94.135]) by fwd00.t-online.de with (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) esmtp id 1idKXF-0ao4si0; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 21:49:09 +0100 Subject: Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT To: esr@thyrsus.com, Maxim Kuvyrkov Cc: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <1685e719-738f-dd4e-c39c-c08e495b202e@arm.com> <9E009921-96EA-44A2-A06A-232711227E69@linaro.org> <20191206172111.GA116282@thyrsus.com> From: Bernd Schmidt Message-ID: <5aaae3f5-473e-bf86-9618-d192893de17f@t-online.de> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 20:49:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191206172111.GA116282@thyrsus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 On 12/6/19 6:21 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Your approach sounds pretty reasonable except for that part. I don't > trust git-svn at *all* - I've collided with it too often during > past conversions. It has a nasty habit of leaving damage in places > that are difficult to audit. So, which steps are we taking to ensure such damage does not occur with either method of conversion? Do we have any verification scripts already? Bernd