svn management, git, etc
Hi everyone,
So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
going to change our repository, it's going to be to git. Since a number of
people are clamoring for that, I think it's a safe bet that it needs to
happen. The problem is that we almost completely lack experience with git.
Andres has some experience with it, although I'm not sure he knows about
certain details like repository conversion, and how our repo would convert
over to a git repo. We may need to solicit Keith for advice on this, since
he's got a lot of experience. Either way, I'm 100% unwilling to do any sort
of switch until after we're frozen for etch, and even then there are issues
like where to host it that need to be solved.
In the interim, the question of how we manage the current repo has come
up. Specifically, with respect to vendor branches, but also to keeping the
upstream sources in-tree. This came up in the past, and I just went with
Branden's preferences, but now that we've got a lot more people committing,
we need to reach some kind of consensus rather than impose it from on high.
Personally, I don't really care how we manage the repo, provided that it
helps us work on providing excellent packages quickly. Perfection is, as
far as I'm concerned, a losing game.
As such, we need to make some decisions on certain things:
1) Do we keep using the vendor branches? Are they worthwhile given that we
keep all important patches in quilt? My sense is no, they're not,
provided that we continue to use quilt this way.
2) Do we keep putting the upstream tree in our svn repo? My sense is that
we should continue to do so. The reason being that we regularly are
patching the auto* build system from upstream. Keeping those generated
files in-tree ensures that we have the same build system from machine to
machine. This is a hideously fragile system as it is, and keeping things
in-tree seems to provide some resiliancy. If someone has a good
mechanism to get around this, I'm all ears, because it is a pain to keep
it all in-tree.
3) Do we need to keep using quilt? Branden's original plan was to keep the
upstream source in-tree and not use dpatch or quilt or anything like it.
This is an option, but if we go this route we need to keep using the
vendor branch. I'm inclined towards quilt myself, as its proven and it
works. On the other hand, we're carrying around quite a bit of code to
make sure quilt works for us. My plan is to switch our system over to
what's built-in to the quilt package to make the less of our problem,
but some people still prefer to keep it all in the repository.
Please reply and let me know what you want and why you want it that way.
Again, I don't care so much about the details provided that we are working
in the best way possible. If what we're doing now isn't working for people,
then we need to find a solution.
- David Nusinow
Reply to: