Re: Moving the packages repo and converting to Mercurial
Hi, Mike -
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Michael Sperber
<sperber(a)deinprogramm.de> wrote:
OK, I now have the CVS repository massaged to the point where cvs2hg
will accept it. There's a basic decision to be made wrt. the
conversion:
Thanks for taking this on.
#2 is more attractive from a design perspective, and it's what
I'd like
to do. It has a downside, however:
There's still central content (the various build files etc.)
that
needs to be in sync with the indvidual packages. Mercurial handles
this just fine, but I don't know how to create a consistent set of
repositories from CVS. If you want to actually build an old version
of a package, you'll have to look up the revision of the central stuff
that matches it manually. This won't be necessary for revisions after
the move.
I think that rebuilding old versions of packages is sufficiently rare
that this is an acceptable tradeoff, and I strongly favor option #2.
PS: If you have commit access to the Alioth Mercurial repository,
please
get an account on Bitbucket (which is where we'll move the XEmacs
repositories in the near future) and e-mail me its name.
Will do.
- Vin
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta