On 13/09/10 19:31, Tom Lane wrote:
* If we do the above, should it be done in the existing CVS repository or just as part of the conversion to git? (I suspect it'd be a lot easier in git.) Similarly, ought we to fix the now-known tagging inconsistencies in the CVS repository, or just leave it for the conversion to deal with?
Let's leave the CVS repository as it is. I don't want to destroy the evidence.
* There are a number of partial tags (tags applied to just a subset of files) in the CVS repository: "MANUAL_1_0" and "SUPPORT" seem to have been applied to only documentation-related files, and "creation" and "Release-1-6-0" were applied only to src/interfaces/perl5/. I find the latter two particularly misleading since they have nothing to do with either creation of the whole project or a "release 1.6" of the whole project. These partial tags don't translate very well to git, either. I'm inclined to propose dropping all four.
What was the purpose of these tags anyway? They don't seem useful, +1 for dropping all four.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
