On 18.08.2011 17:17, Rob Weir wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > wrote: >> Stephan Bergmann wrote on Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 15:46:33 +0200: >>> On Aug 16, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>> > By request I've created a new SVN dump file, this time from Linux. >>> >>> I would make the commit log more detailed than just "initial import," >> >> Then edit it post-import. >> > > > There are a few things we need to get right before import: > > 1) What repositories and what revisions are we importing?
I think that this is already clear: it's OOO340m1 and it was agreed that this is the right one. > > 2) Do we have the basic directory structure right? (Could fix that > later, but easier to get it right initially) The structure is fine and AFAIK reflects the consensus, just the names "main" and "extras" are debatable. We will have an "extras" module in the "main" repo, perhaps we can find a better name for that part. But that can be changed easily post import. > 3) Are we mangling the files when converting, e.g., eol style, > executable bit, etc. (We have issues with around 10 files, which I > have excluded from this import. We can add them post import) The missing files indees can be added post import, and we can also deal with the EOL changes later. IMHO. > I think we have the basics right. At least no one has said otherwise. > I have not heard any issues raised that can be easily fixed > post-import. > > We should all remember that right now, I am the only able to make > changes to this dump file, and re-running this > import/verify/dump/gzip/transfer process takes hours to turn around, > since I'm running it on an old laptop. But as soon as we get this on > the server, any committer can make a change, and doing so will take > them 30 seconds. > > Getting this on the server will allow us to make improvements in parallel. Indeed. Let's move forward. Regards, Mathias
