From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 84654 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2020 12:09:28 -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 84605 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jan 2020 12:09:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-10.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_COUK,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=H*i:sk:CAFiYyc, H*MI:sk:64e874d, online X-HELO: smtp2.wavenetuk.net Received: from smtp.wavenetuk.net (HELO smtp2.wavenetuk.net) (195.26.37.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 12:09:25 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.212] (host81-138-1-83.in-addr.btopenworld.com [81.138.1.83]) by smtp2.wavenetuk.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4F79A60015C; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 12:09:23 +0000 (GMT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; delsp=yes; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Subject: Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT From: Iain Sandoe In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 12:09:00 -0000 Cc: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , Maxim Kuvyrkov , "Eric S. Raymond" , GCC Development , Alexandre Oliva , Jeff Law , Mark Wielaard , Jakub Jelinek , Segher Boessenkool , Richard Biener Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: References: <5DCEA32B-3E36-4400-B931-9F4E2A8F3FA5@linaro.org> <155B5BFD-6ECF-4EBF-A38C-D6DD178FB497@linaro.org> <2b6330f2-1a00-ac89-fd3c-4b70e5454f4b@arm.com> <9B71A0F7-CD93-4636-BFC7-1D1DBC040F07@linaro.org> <6EE7BD53-6677-49D2-BCDD-56CD7DA855E9@linaro.org> <88B4DAF3-33C1-445F-8F5A-809D5463D0F9@linaro.org> <20200108221119.GA94728@thyrsus.com> <20200109023804.GR3191@gate.crashing.org> <27A7DEAB-42B9-4A5A-BE89-618F7ED2347E@linaro.org> <64e874d6-a414-3e36-81d4-9d4f5eb6e3c9@arm.com> To: Joseph Myers X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg00113.txt.bz2 Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:49 AM Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: >> On 10/01/2020 07:33, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>>> On Jan 9, 2020, at 5:38 AM, Segher Boessenkool >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 11:34:32PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: >>>>> As noted on overseers, once Saturday's DATESTAMP update has run at >>>>> 00:16 >>>>> UTC on Saturday, I intend to add a README.MOVED_TO_GIT file on SVN >>>>> trunk >>>>> and change the SVN hooks to make SVN readonly, then disable gccadmin's >>>>> cron jobs that build snapshots and update online documentation until >>>>> they >>>>> are ready to run with the git repository. Once the existing git mirror >>>>> has picked up the last changes I'll make that read-only and disable >>>>> that >>>>> cron job as well, and start the conversion process with a view to >>>>> having >>>>> the converted repository in place this weekend (it could either be made >>>>> writable as soon as I think it's ready, or left read-only until people >>>>> have had time to do any final checks on Monday). Before then, I'll >>>>> work >>>>> on hooks, documentation and maintainer-scripts updates. >>>> >>>> Where and when and by who was it decided to use this conversion? >>> >>> Joseph, please point to message on gcc@ mailing list that expresses >>> consensus of GCC community to use reposurgeon conversion. Otherwise, >>> it is not appropriate to substitute one's opinion for community >>> consensus. >> >> I've gone back through this thread (if I've missed, or misrepresented, >> anybody who's expressed an opinion I apologize now). >> >> Segher Boessenkool >> "If Joseph and Richard agree a candidate is good, then I will agree as >> well. All that can be left is nit-picking, and that is not worth it >> anyway:" >> >> Jeff Law >> "When Richard and I spoke we generally agreed that we felt a reposurgeon >> conversion, if it could be made to work was the preferred solution, >> followed by Maxim's approach and lastly the existing git-svn mirror." >> >> Richard Earnshaw (lists) >> FWIW, I now support using reposurgeon for the final conversion. >> >> And, of course, I'm taking Joseph's opinion as read :-) >> >> So I don't see any clear dissent and most folks just want to get this >> done. > > Just to chime in I also just want to get it done (well, I can handle > SVN as well :P). > I trust Joseph, too, but then from my POV anything not worse than the > current > mirror works for me. Thanks to Maxim anyway for all the work - without > that > we'd not switch in 10 other years... > > Btw, "consensus" among the quiet doesn't usually work and "consensus" among > the most vocal isn't really "consensus". I think GCC (and FOSS) works by > giving power to those who actually do the work. Doesn't make it easier > when > there are two, of course ;) Thanks to all those who’ve put (a lot of) effort into doing this work and those who’ve challenged and tested the conversions, for my part, I am also happy to take Joseph’s recommendation. One minor nit (and accepted that this might be too late). mail commit messages like this: [gcc-reposurgeon-8(refs/users/jsm28/heads/test-branch)] Test git hooks interaction with Bugzilla. seem to have a title stretched by redundant infomation ; at least "users/jsm28/test-branch” would seem to contain all the necessary information will commits in the user namespace appear on the mailing list in the end? thanks again Iain