> 1. The central repo can still be svn, and users/devs wishing to use > git can use git-svn to pull/push changes.
I have developed a tool to create a read-only Git mirror of the Subversion repositories, it's here: https://github.com/rdiez/orbuild/tree/master/Scripts/GitSvnMirror For developers planning to contribute on a patch basis, it could be enough. This tool relies in fact on git-svn and I realised during development that git-svn is actually not very reliable, especially if the Subversion server is not completely healthy, which used to be the case with OpenCore's repositories (at least when I developed the tool). Whenever the Subversion server timed-out for some request, had some repository inconsistency or whatever (I never found out what the exact cause was), I got unhelpful, generic error or warning messages from git-svn. More worryingly, subsequent git-svn updates would not fail any more, but your checked out repository ended up missing files. I only realised because I became suspicious and compared it against a Subversion checkout with a diff tool. > 2. (My preference.) The central repo can use git, and a read-only svn > mirror can be provided by using a cron job to push changes from the If you host your git repository in Github, you get that for free, take a look here: https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-support https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support Github is fast, reliable, free (as in beer), fully featured, well known and hasn't got a tendency to place open-source repositories behind a registration wall. We had many issues with OpenCores in the past, although I must admit it seems to be working better now. They now provide anonymous access for gnu-src, but not for any other repositories I know of. Every time I asked around, the only reason I was given to stick with OpenCores was some perceived branding value. Regards, Ruben _______________________________________________ OpenRISC mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
