On 27.02.2018, at 22:07, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> IIUC the proposal was to import the old svn mirror as a git repo, and
> Betrand argued this would be a really large repo, and that's an
> impediment for something which would be heavily cloned.
You are right.
It could be two repos: the old one wi
On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 20:57 +, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
> On 12.02.2018, at 01:23, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> > The basic proposal as I see it would be to add a new 'sling' top-
> > level
> > github repo, which means that:
> >
> > 1. we control what goes in there - README.md most importantl
On 12.02.2018, at 01:23, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> The basic proposal as I see it would be to add a new 'sling' top-level
> github repo, which means that:
>
> 1. we control what goes in there - README.md most importantly
> 2. old links to sling commits and files will be broken .
No! It's absolute
+1
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Robert Munteanu
> wrote:
> > ...The basic proposal as I see it would be to add a new 'sling' top-level
> > github repo, which means that:
> >
> > 1. we control what goes in there - README.md most
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Robert Munteanu wrote:
> ...The basic proposal as I see it would be to add a new 'sling' top-level
> github repo, which means that:
>
> 1. we control what goes in there - README.md most importantly
> 2. old links to sling commits and files will be broken . ...
+1
Hi,
I usually am reluctant in revisiting old decisions, especially ones
that were so discussed, like this one. Some summaries of previous
discussion are at [1], [2] . But Alex makes some good points and after
the migration I think we should consider whether backwards
compatibility of incoming link