Am 07/05/2011 10:04 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Mathias Bauer<mathias_ba...@gmx.net> wrote:
On 05.07.2011 18:14, Mathias Bauer wrote:
It seems that my memory had fooled me: so if anybody can create an svn
dump file, I will try to recap what we have agreed to so far and have a
look into the conversion. In case anyone else is already at this, please
let me know.
Having said that, there's a thought that makes me wonder: we have 117
cws with more or less unfinished work. I doubt that we will integrate
them all anytime soon, as integration also comprises developing the
merged code further until it has sufficient quality for becoming part of
the trunk. [Wat is "sufficient" is still undefined - we surely won't
continue the overdone QA approval process from the "old" OOo project,
but OTOH also shouldn't throw code at the repository at will.]
Some of the 117 cws are anbandoned work, others are work in an early
state that most probably doesn't make sense to be continued without the
developers starting it.
Do we really want to have code in the svn repo that will never be used?
The alternative would be to add cws to svn only after review.
Right. That is why I was thinking that maybe we just create an
archival copy of the entire repository, including all CWS, and host
that as a read only Hg or git instance. Then migrate the trunk to
SVN, If there are some CWS that we know are already approved for
3.4, then include those as well.
That way, if someone does come by, months later, and decide they want
to complete work CWS, then they can still clone them and work on them.
But then they would need to copy them into a SVN working copy, and
merge and commit from there. Obviously, this does complicate things
for the future CWS developers. But they are in the best position to
stabilize and merge their work.
OK, to keep the code in a special branch in our new the Apache SVN repo
or in a separated one as archive. For me it seems to be the same: Keep
instead of delete.
Marcus
