Rob Landley: > The most recent reemergence of this concept was: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/tinycc-devel/2007-05/msg00139.html > > And I've barely touched my tree since then. (It usually takes me at least > three months to regain interest when this happens, and this time I'm busy > enough with other things it may take much longer.)
Hmm, my intent was to let you keep going while using Hg - so you wouldn't need to use CVS - while letting people who pull from CVS to keep pulling doing so. All I intend to do is pull changesets from your Hg tree into CVS, as you make changes to your Hg branch.... NOT to _maintain_ the stuff in CVS. That way, people who currently pull from CVS can keep doing so, and the CVS can can act as the "backup" in case your server goes down/away (that happened a few months ago). I've been sending patches to you, and telling others to do the same. So just keep modifying tcc using Hg, as you want to; you have a more active tree. The whole point was to let you keep making modifications as you see fit! I got pulled off on some other work, which is why I haven't pulled Changesets into CVS yet. But I still intend copy your tree into CVS (with history of changes, modulo CVS limits). But the point was so that you can keep making changes using Hg, without needing to touch CVS. --- David A. Wheeler _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
