Am 08/01/2011 10:33 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
So where are we with this? The last I heard, the proposal was to
store an archival version of the Hg repositories at apache-extras [1]
and then to check the tip into SVN.
Were there any objections to this approach? Yes, I know it is not
AFAIK no.
ideal. But ideal doesn't seem to be working very well right now ;-)
The ideal way would be to migrate stuff from HG to SVN. But I think
anybody has understood in the meantime that this would result in data
loss (history).
I suppose one remaining thing to close on would be the repository
structure. Do we want to merge the translation and the code
repositories into one? Keep them as separate paths in the same
repository? Or have them in separate repositories? This is an issue
for both the tip checkin into SVN as well as the Hg archive.
At Oracle we have separated the L10N stuff from the normal code to
simplify things. We should continue this, so everybody can build the
office like he/she wants without to be forced to integrate all
languages. Mostly en-US is the most preferred one.
As Apache has only one repository for everything there is no question to
split into separate ones. But we should store the L10N code in separate
pathes.
In apache-extras we should do an 1:1 transfer, so 1 repo for the code
and 1 for L10N.
My 2 ct.
Marcus
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Malte Timmermann
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 28.07.2011 12:37, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Greg,
On Thursday, 2011-07-28 00:41:40 -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
1) import just the OOO340 tip into svn
2) move all the Hg repositories over to apache-extras.org. That
supports Hg and it supports "any OSI license". We can indefinitely
retain history there without it being "part of" our ASF project.
+1
Yes - sounds good! :)
Malte.
