Cyril Plisko wrote: > Richard Lowe wrote: > > Stephen Lau wrote: [snip] > > In theory +1, but asking the genunix.org folks if this would impact > > their subversion stuff at all would be worthwhile. > > It would, definitely. OTOH, one may ask what is the need for subversion > repo if mercurial repo is available. The answer is - I do not know. > There are two ongoing projects (AFAIK) using the svn repo right now.
See below... > First is Polaris, but we'll be transitioning to mercurial soon. > (fingers crossed) > > The second is ksh93 integration. I am not sure what is their schedule > or constraints, but I think that we need to help this project as much > as we can, rather than disturb them. Well, right now we need the subversion repository becase it keeps the prototype codebase (and all the fine-grained putback commets which should be IMO very valueable for the review and future work) and (more important) ToDo lists, worklogs and prototype scripts. It would be a disaster if the subversion repository would go away in the next two months... > After these two projects sorted out I think it would be safe to > phase out svn repo in favor of mercurial. I disagree here - IMO it would be nice to have two parallel repositories as "official opensolaris.org" solution - one "mercurial" and one "subversion" with a way to sync in both directions. For example many tools support "subversion" (usually second afer CVS) but "mercurial" support appears to be non-existant - neither BugZilla nor code scanners (e.g. things like Coverity) have "mercurial" support or even plan to support it right now... and locking users of such tools out would IMO a quite huge loss. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
