On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: >> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 15:58, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I can see the point of wanting to be dead certain the repository isn't >>> changing under you during the data migration. Perhaps we need an agreed >>> window between last call for commits and the actual lock-out. > >> To prevent that, I just need to shut it down for 2 minutes to rsync >> the latest changes off it and onto the new git box. Maybe that's how >> we should do it. > > That sounds like a reasonable scheme to me, especially since it leaves > the cvs repository functional. Dunno about you, but I want a fallback > plan in case this turns into a disaster ...
I don't think anybody proposed permanently deleting the CVS repository. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
