Re: Subversion migration update
Henri Yandell wrote: On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. j-t-service, j-t-site, j-t-tools Ready to do phase-2? Where should they go in svn:tomcat/? Which need tags/branches? So it would be tomcat/service, tomcat/site, tomcat/tools, etc ? Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. j-t-service, j-t-site, j-t-tools Ready to do phase-2? Where should they go in svn:tomcat/? Which need tags/branches? Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Henri Yandell wrote: On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Any other comments/concerns? I have jakarta-tools down as a Tomcat CVS module, though looking at it seems to indicate that it is very dead, not edited for 5 years. Still, the tags are all TOMCAT_3_1 based, so I figure you guys get to decide what to do with it: I'd noticed that watchdog for Tomcat 3.2.x requires this to build. Since nothing else in Jakarta needs it, I'll bring it across with j-t-service and j-t-site and place it in the archive area with j-t-service. Mark * Somehow come over to SVN because Tomcat-3's tags will need it to build(?). * Put into the pot for archiving (http://www.apache.org/dev/drafts/subversion-migration-plan.txt) Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Mark Thomas wrote: Not having been around when we have done this before, do we just branch the previous version? If so, the simplest thing to do would be to create 5.5.x branches for each component and develop 6.0 (assuming we call it that) in trunk. I can do this as soon as we are ready. Yes, it has to be called 6.0 because of the new specifications release. Given the said specification schedule, I don't see anything new being included (besides code cleanup thanks to the mandated Java 5 support) unless components get donated or something. Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Any other comments/concerns? I have jakarta-tools down as a Tomcat CVS module, though looking at it seems to indicate that it is very dead, not edited for 5 years. Still, the tags are all TOMCAT_3_1 based, so I figure you guys get to decide what to do with it: * Somehow come over to SVN because Tomcat-3's tags will need it to build(?). * Put into the pot for archiving (http://www.apache.org/dev/drafts/subversion-migration-plan.txt) Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
- Original Message - From: Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:37 PM Subject: Re: Subversion migration update On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Any other comments/concerns? I have jakarta-tools down as a Tomcat CVS module, though looking at it seems to indicate that it is very dead, not edited for 5 years. Yup, it's a dodo ;-). Still, the tags are all TOMCAT_3_1 based, so I figure you guys get to decide what to do with it: * Somehow come over to SVN because Tomcat-3's tags will need it to build(?). * Put into the pot for archiving (http://www.apache.org/dev/drafts/subversion-migration-plan.txt) It's needed for Watchdog, but not Tomcat. My vote is to archive it, since it is extremely unlikely that it will ever come to life ever again. Hen This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments. In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Mark Thomas wrote: Mark Thomas wrote: snip The performance comparison between CVS and SVN is in the early stages and I will post some results once I have a more complete set. Tests performed on WinXP SP2, with Tortoise CVS 1.8.18 and Tortoise SVN 1.2.1 using the Watchdog repository. For tests using a single file I used build.xml. The results are (averages in seconds): Operation CVS SVN checkout 38 51 history 45 blame 47 diff42 revert 71 Also, SVN does not support revision graphs. Some tools can derive the graph but for the ASF repository this will take hours, possibly days. See http://subversion.tigris.org/ for a list of other SVN benefits. I am +1 for moving the remaining Tomcat CVS modules to SVN. I'm +10^-60 or something. Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Do we need an OK from the spec team before we do stage 3? I don't think so, we're not changing the code. Any other comments/concerns? Right after that, we'll need new repositories to implement the new Servlet 2.5 / JSP 2.1. Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Remy Maucherat wrote: Mark Thomas wrote: I am +1 for moving the remaining Tomcat CVS modules to SVN. I'm +10^-60 or something. He he he. Right after that, we'll need new repositories to implement the new Servlet 2.5 / JSP 2.1. Not having been around when we have done this before, do we just branch the previous version? If so, the simplest thing to do would be to create 5.5.x branches for each component and develop 6.0 (assuming we call it that) in trunk. I can do this as soon as we are ready. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
On 8/18/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: Mark Thomas wrote: I am +1 for moving the remaining Tomcat CVS modules to SVN. I'm +10^-60 or something. He he he. Well, the +10 is promising :) Right after that, we'll need new repositories to implement the new Servlet 2.5 / JSP 2.1. Not having been around when we have done this before, do we just branch the previous version? If so, the simplest thing to do would be to create 5.5.x branches for each component and develop 6.0 (assuming we call it that) in trunk. I can do this as soon as we are ready. svn mkdir https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/servletapi/2.5/ (or whatever). No longer need to have Infra for this kind of thing. It's either handled by the Tomcat community at large, or for some bits (user authentication) by Remy as chair. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Mark Thomas wrote: snip The performance comparison between CVS and SVN is in the early stages and I will post some results once I have a more complete set. Tests performed on WinXP SP2, with Tortoise CVS 1.8.18 and Tortoise SVN 1.2.1 using the Watchdog repository. For tests using a single file I used build.xml. The results are (averages in seconds): Operation CVS SVN checkout 38 51 history 45 blame 47 diff42 revert 71 Also, SVN does not support revision graphs. Some tools can derive the graph but for the ASF repository this will take hours, possibly days. See http://subversion.tigris.org/ for a list of other SVN benefits. I am +1 for moving the remaining Tomcat CVS modules to SVN. Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Do we need an OK from the spec team before we do stage 3? Any other comments/concerns? Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
