Andy Green wrote: > You seem to have elided a bit from how we left it in .tw, which involved > explicit migration to git during your holiday and someone shadowing it > in svn.
That's not quite what I remember, since this would mean that the migration would happen before we actually have a method that allows us to continue to synthesize sequential patches, thus possibly creating a rift in the code base. Of course, if we can find a suitable solution for this earlier, then there's no reason to delay the migration. (Or, in fact, to continue maintaining the then completely redundant SVN repository.) I'll answer to the rest of your mail in private. - Werner
