Richard Lowe wrote: >>> In theory +1, but asking the genunix.org folks if this would impact >>> their subversion stuff at all would be worthwhile. >> >> It would, definitely. OTOH, one may ask what is the need for subversion >> repo if mercurial repo is available. The answer is - I do not know. >> There are two ongoing projects (AFAIK) using the svn repo right now. > > They were the projects I was thinking of, it seemed uncool to +1 it > knowing of projects it may cause trouble. > >> >> First is Polaris, but we'll be transitioning to mercurial soon. >> (fingers crossed) >> >> The second is ksh93 integration. I am not sure what is their schedule >> or constraints, but I think that we need to help this project as much >> as we can, rather than disturb them. >> >> After these two projects sorted out I think it would be safe to >> phase out svn repo in favor of mercurial. >> > > Well, the plan Steve outlined above would still do the per-build source > tarballs, and of course, it's always possible for you to merge up the > svn repository based on an hg clone (I can't think of any reason it > wouldn't be, anyway).
Okay, so starting with today's delivery - I've tossed the Mercurial bundles. I'll keep delivering the source tarball for now while we get input from the ksh93 & polaris teams. ksh93 & polaris teams: Is it okay if we stop doing the 'nightly' (neh: weekly) source tarball deliveries? It seems redundant (in both time and space) now that we have the Mercurial mirror up. I will continue to deliver the build-synchronised source tarballs. Thanks for the input Cyril and Rich.. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development
