On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:38:41PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > I wonder... > The problem here is about fusionforge only, in fact. > If we were to move git (i.e. the vast majority of its usage) to another > place, and took down fusionforge (i.e. no more guest user management), I > do not think there is a reason to shut down the rest. > SVN could stay there, with viewvc and everything, and let packages and > project migrate whenever they need something not provided by old-alioth > (f.e. direct contribution from a non-DD that won't be possible without > fusionforge running to create its user and dealing with groups). I assume that you mean a read-only dump of all the old CVS repos, which could be hosted on a newer-than-wheezy machine? > @tille: please have a look at pkg-haskell and their DHG_packages > repository. I've never interacted with it, and I find it highly > unusual and non-standard that I doubt the usual tooling can deal with > it, but it might of ispiration about how to deal with R packages > maybe? I /believe/ that the reason we have the monolithic DHG_packages is because we frequently have to upload every or almost every Haskell package at once (e.g. bump all build-deps to use new ghc and upload to experimental). I don't think it's because the workflow for packaging any given Haskell package is very simple, which was what Andreas mentioned w.r.t. R. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature