Re: git question

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Fred" == Fred Cooke <fred.cooke@gmail.com> writes:

Tom> There have been a lot of discussions about this, consult the archives.
Tom> The blocking issue seems to be finding a person with the motivation and
Tom> stamina to do it.

Fred> I've been on the list four months and have 360 threads and 1000+
Fred> emails in my account and this is the first one with git in the subject
Fred> line. I figured it was time for a bump! Who has the necessary
Fred> authority to get it done? What does getting it done actually mean? Is
Fred> it as simple as turning off CVS committing, updating the git repos and
Fred> starting to commit to the git repo? (plus links and website updates,
Fred> etc, of course)

One of the threads is here:

    http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2010-01/threads.html#00000

Here's another:

    http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2011-10/threads.html#00075

Here's one note worth reading:

    http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2011-10/msg00076.html

which links to the canonical:

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-03/msg00486.html

This last one lays out what needs to be done.

The authority is per-project, which is part of what makes this task
hard.  However, Joseph's plan is to let each project decide for itself,
so you could probably just convert some subset of the projects and leave
the rest alone.

Fred> It would make everyone's lives a LOT easier if it were the official
Fred> go-to repo. Think of all the poor people down-stream like distro
Fred> maintainers :-)

Yeah, I agree.  It is just a tough task and I think people have chosen
instead to adapt to the current situation.  I personally just use CVS
for the final commit, nothing else.  This makes it pretty much bearable.

Tom