>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeremy Bennett <[email protected]> >Reply-to: [email protected] >To: [email protected], [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Openrisc] [OpenRISC] toolchain >Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:47:42 +0000 >
>On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:01 +0100, Jonas Bonn wrote: >> On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 18:14 +0000, Jeremy Bennett wrote: >> > The master repository is on SVN at openCores.org, so we should get your >> > code into there. To date we have mirrored specific FSF releases of each >> > tool, but if you are tracking mainline, we should create src-mainline >> > and gcc-mainline trees. The build script will then be rather simpler, >> > and merging upstream changes must easier. >> > >> > I'd like to propose that Pete is given SVN write access (has to be >> > approved through this mailing list). >> >> Given that the last five people to work on toolchain bits have all >> worked out of the git repositories, I'd like to propose that we ditch >> the SVN repository altogether. I'd even go so far as propose that >> Pete's repository become the master, if he's willing to take on the task >> of merging patches from the rest of us... that's not a lot of work given >> the low level of activity on this front. >> >> If somebody wants to mirror that into SVN, that's their prerogative... >> but I don't think we should be punishing people who do good work by >> forcing them to bend over backwards to push well-formed patches into the >> SVN cesspool. > >We have had this discussion in the past, and agreed that we would use >SVN where the upstream uses SVN or CVS and git where the upstream uses >git. > >Promoting multiple master repositories for the same tool fragments the >project, making it hard for anyone to adopt and should be discouraged by >*all* the OpenCores community. > >Don't forget that with a large user base, OpenCores generates a lot of >support email. After a decade of working on the project, my name is in a >lot of code, so a lot of that support comes as personal email to me. The >commonest problem is people using some out-of-date mirror of the code. > >Sticking to the one true repository solves this. That is why I have >proposed Pete should have SVN write access to commit his code. Since he >is mirroring mainline, he is familiar with SVN and CVS anyway. > >The current tool chain went through extensive testing to ensure it is >robust. I am delighted that someone is taking that work forward, and >congratulations to Pete for his contribution. > >But we need to follow our agreed engineering process, ensure the new >code is tested to the same standards as the old, reviewing on these >mailing lists. It will initially be the development version of the tool >chain, and then later will become the stable version. > >This way, anyone coming new to OpenCores can be confident that they will >find good quality software. At the same time, Pete's work will be >visible to the widest possible community, and in a way that ensures it >gets the best possible support. > >Pete - could you post the regression results for the new tool chain. If >you want help with any particular issues, I suggest posting them here >and in Bugzilla, so others can join in. > > >Jeremy I also agree with Jeremy. We have seen an increase of support-issues due to multiple repositories with different content, seen both in the forum/mailing-lists/IRC and in emails sent directly to us. As for Peter contribution.....Excellent! And I also think he should get SVN write access. /Marcus
_______________________________________________ OpenRISC mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
