Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 20:58:50 +0100 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: David Romano <unobe@cpan.org> Cc: doceng@freebsd.org, freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Conversion to SVN Message-ID: <CADLo83_EbMgE=ZA%2BLRhLig2yZBgrNDCLRr4T2tCjXoCMk1e4Tg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E8F54BB.4000206@cpan.org> References: <20111007141312.GJ26743@acme.spoerlein.net> <4E8F54BB.4000206@cpan.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7 Oct 2011 20:57, "David Romano" <unobe@cpan.org> wrote: > > On 10/07/2011 07:13, Ulrich Sp=F6rlein wrote: >> >> 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. > > I'm a new kid on the block but I'm curious why git is being overlooked fo= r the new repository. Just because it's a distributed VCS doesn't mean that i= t can't be used like SVN. I started with SVN, then moved to SVK for a spell, and dabbled in darcs before I tried out git. In my experience as a developer, it's been much easier to merge changes and keep track of branches/tags. Branching/tagging isn't an expensive operation in git becaus= e git focuses on content changes, not file changes. Not to get too off-base, but this can *definitely* help with having clear documentation for a specific version of FBSD. There is currently a FBSD git repo for src/ and ports/ hosted on github.com if some developers haven't heard of it and are interested in seeing how its capabilities can help the FBSD community. > Basically we like sequential versioning, which git doesn't do too well (at all) Chris.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83_EbMgE=ZA%2BLRhLig2yZBgrNDCLRr4T2tCjXoCMk1e4Tg>