From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 7 14:13:13 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC8C01065679; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:13:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from uqs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from acme.spoerlein.net (acme.spoerlein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:131:23c2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA578FC1C; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:13:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (acme.spoerlein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:131:23c2::1]) by acme.spoerlein.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p97EDC5D082064 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Oct 2011 16:13:12 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from uqs@FreeBSD.org) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 16:13:12 +0200 From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= To: doc@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20111007141312.GJ26743@acme.spoerlein.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: doceng@FreeBSD.org Subject: Conversion to SVN X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:13:14 -0000 Hi, it looks like I'm not the only one thinking about moving the doc/www repos from CVS to SVN, and other people actually have not only thought about it but already played around with conversions. gavin did some preliminary conversions and it turns out that we end up with ~50k revisions and about 650MB of changes (IIRC). There are also lots of weird branches, so perhaps we could size that down a bit. What I, personally, would like to see is us using the same svn repo as src. That means we would have to stop svn.freebsd.org for the conversion, turn off email sending, dump 50k revisions into it (under /doc and /www perhaps? where should branches/tags end up?), then turn everything back on. I haven't really thought that through to the end, but setting up a separate svn repo just seems silly to me and is another administrative overhead. ports might be special enough (due to sheer size) to justify a separate repo/machine, but not doc/www. Please discuss and share your experiments and thoughts. Cheers, Uli