From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1El7IT-0001f4-0g for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:10:05 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBAG8T9e018836; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:08:29 GMT Received: from aei-tech.com (host-216-153-235-25.ind.choiceone.net [216.153.235.25]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jBAG4B10031089 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:04:12 GMT Received: (qmail 24876 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2005 11:04:09 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO www.aei-tech.com) (192.168.1.1) by 192.168.1.1 with SMTP; 10 Dec 2005 11:04:09 -0500 Received: from 69.136.169.173 (SquirrelMail authenticated user ctennis) by www.aei-tech.com with HTTP; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 11:04:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <62161.69.136.169.173.1134230649.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> In-Reply-To: <20051210145345.GS1198@mail.lieber.org> References: <439AC181.2080003@gentoo.org> <20051210145345.GS1198@mail.lieber.org> Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 11:04:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The deal with epkgmove From: "Caleb Tennis" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Archives-Salt: 537da9f0-06e0-4932-b116-d7541031e983 X-Archives-Hash: 3c2638994381f3370e103a68b2239a82 > As for moving packages by hand vs. using a tool, that's not really infra's > call. If you were asking about CVS vs. SVN, I have been and remain > opposed > to using SVN for gentoo-x86 until someone can offer a whole lot of > assurances around SVN's ability to manage a repo of our size. (1.3GB, > 216,000+ files and counting) KDE moved to Subversion earlier this year, with a few million lines of source code and hundreds of branches and tags. It did it flawlessly and maintained over 400,000 commit history items. I don't think stability is the biggest hurdle here. I think the conversion process will be - they had to write a lot of code from scratch to handle maintaining all of that history (the stock cvs2svn wasn't robust enough), and they had to run the conversion process a number of times, find the bugs, rework their conversion code, and rerun. It was a lengthy process (a few weeks I believe). It's going to require someone to actually write the conversion code and provide a proof of concept conversion. If anyone's up to the challenge, I imagine contacting their sysadmins would be a good start. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list