Hosting and Supporting GIT conversion of Fedora CVS to enable downstream development efforts and distributions

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:56:23 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> The question as I now see it is whether the Fedora Project Board
> cares about the use cases described and wants to support that.
> Previous discussions about moving to distributed SCM's were focused
> on the advantages (or lack of that) to package maintainers. Atleast
> some derivative distributions find it useful and moving to a
> distributed SCM would avoid the need to duplicate package CVS under
> git.
> 
> Enabling spins was a board decision. Is supporting the needs of 
> derivative distributions a equivalent priority?  I think the answer
> to that should come from the Fedora Project Board.


The problem is that we don't want these downstreams to become dependent
on a copy of the content, which may or may not be valid over time, or
may or may not be continued over time.  If it's an experiment, that's
what RFRs (Request for Resource) are for, I've used an RFR in the past
to do a short term experiment with a direct conversion of dist-cvs to
hg, and to git.  However they had expected end times and the resources
were recycled.

I don't think anybody disagrees that we should move to another SCM that
allows for better downstream interaction.  However just a direct copy
of our workflow to git doesn't help.  Nobody wants to work on the hard
problem, thus nothing gets done, no matter /who/ wants it.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071128/a49c16ff/attachment.sig>