Another issue would be to move the code review tool from rietveld to Review Board. Do we have it ready at all? If not, what are the steps to set it up?
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that it is technically possible to make clean Hg->SVN migration > and it would be pity to give up the history. I ll try to investigate it some > more for some more time. Let's postpone the decision for a while (2-3 > weeks). > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Michael MacFadden < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Honestly at this point, I would vote for just a clean check in. While we >> can talk about he use of having the history in the SVN, the fact of the >> matter is that I don't think it is really important enough to hold us up. >> That fact alone has been the only reason why we haven't migrated the source >> in nearly 10 months. The fact that no one on the project has spent the time >> over the last 10 months to figure out a solution says to me that it really >> is not that important. The revision history will stay on Google code for >> historical reference if we need it. >> >> Imagine if we had just switched over at the beginning of the project. We >> would then have 10 months of check in history in the SVN. Most times when >> we need to look back at the revisions it's because something had changed >> recently. If we had 10 months of history, I doubt we would be going back to >> the Google Code Hg very much at all. I think the need for the Hg history >> will decrease rapidly over time once we actually make the move. >> >> I know it would be nice to have the history, but it seems to be the road >> block. If we just bite the bullet and make the switch a few months from now >> I don't think it will be impacting us at all. >> >> ~Michael >> >> >> On Sep 4, 2011, at 6:13 AM, Yuri Z wrote: >> >> > Hello >> > Yes, you are stressing an important point. I don't think anyone on the >> Wave >> > project would like cancellation of the podling. So, the only solution >> would >> > be just complete the migration and move the source code to the Apache >> Infra, >> > hopefully along with the Wiki. >> > However, there are technical issues as well. I already contacted the >> infra >> > and the Apache SVN mail lists for assistance on the move from Hg to SVN, >> but >> > it seems like there's no single easy to use tool to do it. There are >> bunch >> > of tools that can help, though, but that requires investigation. If the >> > infra would provide some tool that would enable automatical migration >> from >> > Hg to SVN - that would be really helpful. >> > Yuri >> > >> > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Christian Grobmeier < >> grobme...@gmail.com>wrote: >> > >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> Wave has entered incubation on 2010-12-01. >> >> I think it is time to re-open the discussion on the source code move >> >> from hg to svn again. The project is now 10 months in incubation and >> >> the sources are still not the ASF. Without sources incubation makes no >> >> sense imho. >> >> >> >> Can we sum up what exactly is going on and what are the blockers? >> >> >> >> I know people are not keen working with SVN, but as long as there is >> >> no GIT at the ASF, this is the only way to go. If this is a blocker, >> >> we should discuss the cancelation of this podling. I think it is not >> >> (or should not) >> >> >> >> Are there technical problems - then we should outline whats expected. >> >> Maybe infra can help >> >> >> >> CHeers >> >> >> >> >
