Datacenter, git, and cvs

[Jesse Keating]

On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 19:55 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> I think of it less as a question of /liking/ CVS, and more an admission 
> that a global workflow change has real costs for each individual developer.
> 
> A "flag day"-style transition is clean and efficient, but often locks 
> out developers who are not able to march in lock-step with the 
> transition schedule.
> 
> I am very pro-git (naturally, being a kernel developer) and want this 
> switch, but it nonetheless means my home-written scripts for maintaining 
> related project packages (cld, chunkd, tabled) must be updated and 
> tested.  Even without local script updates, developers have to learn new 
> stuff just to keep functioning at the same level as before. 

Because we are not just moving source control backends, but also
changing workflow, a cvs gateway to the git server wouldn't get you very
far, unless it's a pretty hacked up gateway.  If somebody wants to work
on a gateway that's cool, I'm not considering it a blocker to rolling
out the change, once we have a working proof of concept and a solid
migration plan blessed by FESCo.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20091214/7fc16484/attachment.sig>