On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 09:15 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I meant to ask whether you plan to look at bzr access logs and compare
them with HTTP access logs to source packages from the archive. The
goal of that would be to evaluate how many users shift to bzr for
retrieving Ubuntu source package.
Well, it's http access logs as well, but that would be an interesting
thing to do.
You could implement different back-ends, but I don't have a desire
to, and I'm not sure it would be a good idea.
Can you elaborate on that?
Why you don't think it would be a good idea?
I'm not sure whether providing branches for each VCS is a good idea,
as I'm not sure it would help collaboration that much. If I grab a bzr
branch to work on a feature, and you want to use git to work on that
feature too then we have to provide a service to synchronise branches
for you, and you would have to wait while my branch was imported to
git before you could start work.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't be allowed to work in your preferred
VCS, just that trying to provide branches of everything in every VCS
isn't going to be a workable solution in my opinion. I think investing
time in things like git-bzr and allowing you to get git branches of
the things you are interested in would be a better way to go.
The UDS session I linked to is about this. This cycle I am going to
be working on bringing up an import of Debian to bzr with shared
revision history and all the merges represented as multi-parent
commits.
Just to be sure, you mean the whole Debian archive, or only the slice
corresponding to Ubuntu main (not sure about the name, but I mean
everything which is not universe).
The whole Debian archive. The branches we have are not just for main
they are all ~15000 source packages.
One thing that is going to hamper us is that we don't have historic
packages for Debian. I'm interested to know if the official version
of snapshot.debian.net will have all the old packages, which would
be a massive help for us. If not then we may end up with the bzr
branches suggesting that Debian was branched off Ubuntu :-)
Unfortunately no, snapshot.d.n can be missing stuff. Not only it
suffered from downtimes which I don't believe has been a posteriori
filled back in, but it is also not really well synchronized with dak
(the archive maintenance tool) runs in Debian. For example, while dak
runs twice a day to change the archive, snapshot.d.n is updated only
once, so it is theoretically possible that a package updated twice in
a day figures only once on snapshot.d.n.
The forthcoming snapshot.debian.*org* will solve this and similar
problems as it will be more tightly coupled with dak, but we don't
have it yet. Even when we will, it wouldn't solve the problem for past
versions.
Thanks for the information, it sounds like we might be a bit stuck
there.
If any interested Debian people can make it to UDS in SF next week
then your input in to the above discussion would be appreciated. We
have a few DDs invited, and plenty of DDs within Ubuntu anyway, so
that perspective will be represented, but having any specifically
interested in this topic would be great.
Well, too bad, I would've loved to attend to discuss this kind of
stuff, but it is definitely impossible to do that now, with such a
short notice.
Sorry about that, I didn't think to bring it up before.
Thanks,
James
___
vcs-pkg-discuss mailing list
vcs-pkg-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/vcs-pkg-discuss
