Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT

[Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

> We talked about it for days, and as far as I understand it Richard agreed.
> 
> But, there is no way I can verify this yet, or is there?  Is there a repo
> we can look at?  Something close to final.

The conversion run I started this afternoon is now running 
git-fast-import.  That part takes about four hours because that's how long 
git-fast-import takes to process a 240 GB file with all the GCC history 
(and then git gc --aggressive, to get the repository down to a reasonable 
size, takes an hour or two).

So tomorrow I expect to have a repository ready to make available.  (In 
fact, two variants - one with branch and tag names essentially as in SVN, 
one with rearrangements done as suggested by Richard.)  And that will be 
along with the results of validation, which I hope will be clean as we've 
fixed all the issues shown up in previous rounds of validation.

This includes the part of Richard's commit message improvements deduced 
purely from the existing commit messages.  It doesn't include the part 
based on Bugzilla data (because the attempt to download the data from 
Bugzilla fell over).  I expect the next conversion run, started after that 
one finishes, to include both parts of Richard's commit message 
improvements, as well as an improvement to commit attribution extraction 
from ChangeLog files (to include attributions from ChangeLog.<branch> 
files, not just plain ChangeLog).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com