Am 18.11.2010 18:32, schrieb "Martin v. Löwis": >>> Alternatively, b1 should be postponed until after the Mercurial >>> migration is done. >> >> I think this "new feature" is not so shocking that it can be used as >> an argument to hold up the migration. If you have another reason to >> stop the migration please say so; personally I can't wait for it to >> happen. > > I can't point out any other specific concern, just a general feeling > that *when* the migration happens, it will be rushed, and we will have > to deal for a long time with the aftermath. For example, I expect that > it will take me several days until I get the Windows build process to > work correctly, and, if the migration gets as rushed as it appears to, > that the migration will happen without everything being worked out > beforehand. > > Therefore, I'm concerned that I will have to work out all the details > on my own, just so that I can produce the b2 binaries (says); this is > not something I look forward to.
How much does the binary build process really depend on version control? I.e., what would be stopping you from making a binary from an archive made with e.g. "svn export"? (I'm really asking because I don't know.) Concerning the SVN external/ subdir, that is quite orthogonal to the main development repo, and doesn't need to be migrated in lockstep (if it is migrated to Mercurial at all in its current shape. > I'm not asking that the migration be stopped - I'm asking that it be > accelerated, so that there is plenty of time to identify all the > problems. But I'm also not willing to put time into it. I think we have anticipated what we could. Of course there will still be problems, but I think not of the sort that causes big disruptions everywhere, preventing our developers from committing or breaking the issue tracker, etc. > Failing the acceleration, I ask that appropriate consequences for > the 3.2 release are drawn: either it is postponed, or done using > Subversion until the final release (I think something can be worked > out then to get the 3.2.1 release from Mercurial - with only slight > incompatibilities). > > In general, I'm *also* concerned about the lack of volunteers that > are interested in working on the infrastructure. I wish some of the > people who stated that they can't wait for the migration to happen > would work on solving some of the remaining problems. Well, put some butter to the fish: how many volunteers would you deem sufficient, and which specific tasks are uncared for in the infrastructure? I can only speak for myself, but I am prepared to put in my time. Georg _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com