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 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]