On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 10:51:19AM +0100, Javier Fern�ndez-Sanguino Pe�a wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Let me propose following alternative plan. > > As far as I see it it's not really an "alternative" plan, that's just step > 4 of the plan I proposed fully detailed. I don't think we should skip steps > 1-3 and > > a) not forewarn authors and translators > b) not maintain website updates while we implement the technical details > c) not wait until what debian-admins have to say regarding this website > update proposal, which drastically changes the way website is updated and > has an impact beyond just the DDP. >
I partially agree. Please, we should wait a word from d-admin as first step. People with ssh access to cvs should be currently sufficiently warned about. We waited two months, a few days of dalay are not a so big problem. I cannot see a real reason to have the old cvs working instead. Anyone with a ssh access can get a snapshot in any moment, and other contributors should anyway avoid committing. They also could wait a few days for transition. > I might be overly cautious here, and I do know this discussion should > have taken place two months ago. But I sincerely prefer to err on the side > of caution than to have people wondering what's going on. > I agree. > Notice that if someone casually browses Alioth's CVS he will now see: > http://cvs.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/ddp/?cvsroot=ddp > where not even a README file says that CVS should _not_ be used! > > I'm adding a news item now telling people that's just up for testing, but > it should not have been done in the first place. > Well done. The project home page should be more clear about the transition status. Something like '<h1>stay tuned, but please do not commit cvs changes on alioth or cvs.d.o even if possible, wihout asking on debian-doc</h1>' could be ideal. There is also a News section for that. -- Francesco P. Lovergine
