RFR: GIT Package VCS

Jeremy Katz katzj at redhat.com
Wed Jun 6 16:55:36 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 11:09 -0500, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:44 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:31 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 09:17 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > > I'm glad this is started back up.  One thing that amuses me is back 
> > > > before the F7 launch it almost seemed assured that we would all go with 
> > > > mercurial.  This line isn't so clear now, a lot of people have been 
> > > > using git.  It seems our future is either going to be A) do nothing and 
> > > > continue with CVS or B) move to HG or Git.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, definitely time to start this back up.  
> > 
> > And just to make things clear, it's time to start up talking about it,
> > investigating our options and getting some things rolling.  But that
> > _doesn't_ mean we should rush things to just get them done based on an
> > arbitrary deadline.  This is the sort of thing we're going to have to
> > live with for a long while, so it's better to have it take an extra
> > release cycle before rolling out and get it right.  Otherwise, we'll
> > have a revolt on our hands :-)
> I agree and I disagree.  Yes, we need to carefully consider our next
> step.  On the other hand I think that we need to get off of CVS as soon
> as possible.  From what I've seen while testing the conversion to GIT
> there seems to be corruption in some of the CVS repositories.  It's most
> noticeable in large/active packages (the kernel is a notable example)
> but sometime small packages are affected.  I don't think that it's had a
> major effect so far because I think that it's relatively rare that
> people go back and look at old revisions of the packages (probably
> because that's so difficult in CVS).

I wouldn't be entirely certain there -- for one thing, don't discount
bugs in the conversion process.  Also, there have been rare cases where
things have been munged a bit directly which leads to things being ...
not exactly as perhaps expected.


More information about the Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list