From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Sa9VX-0001Au-6X for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 31 May 2012 17:49:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E326E05ED; Thu, 31 May 2012 17:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4106FE0655 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 17:48:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcjk13 with SMTP id jk13so1245124bkc.40 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 10:48:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tJmca0w0sAoobCagPTYcpgv/C37ze2LBvZJq3y2gzDc=; b=a60gSu10T7ffA1rFlHciVfpEHzCTpVPPFWzqyO8M71IfQARIPzmaK3reMzt1ZSWBx1 MkA0wHmq5Mpgg/yWhfv4r6X3Mz9EYpnjWO4OHEm0Hwb+hdonY6frj88cYNee/9bAqss5 Wyq1rAkbJM0jEe5LFJEwjnlUWNX/7Wjr3S4NBAdrHjasRNeGLcFgwpnXMCdzHNYcJ2GQ OtZJ6yOaC1+Ts0YoZ2ZgzRKjfkQabGcCFfhN3Omz70+fvTvAJhmRbsunoXGX+WP1GJtC BG6be7Qomfc9+d64GG18hkRnjuZMzzib14eXstBZpFZAg5y0hVMuxZRhByn6zgK6uoaY zPrA== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.155.139 with SMTP id s11mr2229949bkw.106.1338486509388; Thu, 31 May 2012 10:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.149.211 with HTTP; Thu, 31 May 2012 10:48:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4FBCDB3D.1070009@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 13:48:29 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: CRzCfzSTW3cgxz7Ia8c3XQ0TLik Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 47bf3a26-54fe-4155-986a-0bd66413069f X-Archives-Hash: 2930773289d584474c3451008bb6fc67 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > 1. > Discussion on merge policy. Originally I thought we would disallow merge > commits, so that we would get a cleaner history. However, it turns out that if > the repo ends up being pushed to different places with slightly different > histories, merges are absolutely going to be required to prevent somebody from > having to rebase at least one of their sets of commits that are already pushed. Not sure I'm following, but I will be the first to admit that I'm a git novice. Would this be aided by a convention, like only committing to master on the gentoo official repository, and any on-the-side work on places like github/etc stays in branches? Those repositories would just keep getting fed commits on master from the official repository. > > 2. > Git-SVN breakage. Why does this matter you're wondering? > We need the newer Git for the commit signing, but it comes with a > price, the git-svn binary has some major failures with SVN 1.7. > Git since 1.7.8 has been broken this way. To clarify - these won't be issues for gentoo per se, but there is a sense that we can't stabilize the latest git because it will break it for people using git-svn on non-gentoo work? I think the general conclusion was that we would not be supporting any mixed git+cvs/svn/etc workflows for gentoo itself. If that is the case, what is our sense of how important this feature even is to gentoo developers? They're the only ones who really have to have the latest git to commit to the official tree. Rich