On 10/12/2017 09:55 PM, Jiří Zárevúcky wrote: > On 12 October 2017 at 21:42, Jan Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: >> I've added a 'merged' branch to the experimental git repo [0]. It >> incudes all older svn + bzr history. It also preserves the committer >> information. >> The script runs ~5mins and the hashes are the same every time it runs, >> so the history should be stable. Nonetheless, I'd prefer if the switch >> to git happened sooner rather than later, as it adds extra steps/time >> to the usual 'git bzr pull; git push' that is enough to keep the master >> branch (bzr history only) up to date. >> > > We can temporarily switch to using a github repo as our main > repository, and then switch back to our own infrastructure when it's > ready. That way the transition happens with least pain possible.
Or just continue to use the one on Git as the main one and let Martin implement the backup to the one on helenos.org in a more relaxed timeframe. I still think there are some sound arguments for using it that way (e.g. it is easier to set up things for the admin team and the admin team becomes more meaningful than in the present situation when most of the things require Martin's intervention). I also imported Jano's merged branch into: https://github.com/HelenOS/helenos-test It contains both the Bazaar and the Subversion history. There are pros and cons to having fake git history. In any case, we could tag the cut-off date (btw tomorrow is Friday 13th) so that we might use it as a sentinel for bisecting. Or we can use it as a historic repo for reference. I am mostly indifferent here, but now that it is there and one can git blame across the whole history, I have a slight preference towards helenos-test becoming the main helenos repository (after a rename, of course). Ideas, preferences, concerns, suggestions? Jakub _______________________________________________ HelenOS-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.modry.cz/listinfo/helenos-devel
