On 08:12 Wed 18 Oct , Jeff Squyres wrote: > I was not on the call last week, but I understand that there was some > discussion about exactly this point (ditch SVN and go 100% git): the > decision was to stick with SVN for userspace stuff and stick with git > for kernel stuff. > > However, this is a larger audience than was on the call. Is there a > significant movement here from the developers to move to 100% git?
Moving (or not moving) userspace to git could be done on per project basis (as actually suggested by Michael). Personally I'm voting for git. Sasha > > (I don't really care) > > > On Oct 17, 2006, at 12:21 PM, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > > >On 17:04 Tue 17 Oct , Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>Quoting r. Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>>At the risk of opening a can of worms, is there any reason we > >>>don't move > >>>the user stuff into its own git tree? This would get rid of svn > >>>altogether... > >> > >>If we do, that should probably be multiple git trees - verbs, > >>management, > >>tests are all more or less independent and developed mostly by > >>different people. > > > >Reasonable. And generally this should not be too bad. > > > >Sasha > > > >_______________________________________________ > >openib-general mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general > > > >To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/ > >openib-general > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Server Virtualization Business Unit > Cisco Systems > _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
