This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Finishing the repository conversion
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr at thyrsus dot com>
- Cc: gcc Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:27:07 -0500
- Subject: Re: Finishing the repository conversion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20171210044534.BF11713A6834@snark.thyrsus.com>
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> wrote:
> (I tried to send an earlier version of this a few days ago. It's not
> in your list archives; an MTA somewhere might have had a bad moment.)
>
> I have good news and better news.
>
> The good news is both reposurgeon bugs known to be blocking the GCC
> repository conversion seem now to be fixed.
>
> The better news is that the person cutting my paychecks has approved
> the GCC repo conversion as a supported activity, which means I can
> concentrate on this until it's done. This couldn't happen sooner
> because NTPsec had to get to 1.0 first.
Great!
> I'm mirroring the repo now. It would helpful if I could get an
> up-to-date copy of the repository's attribution map (usernames to full
> names and email addresses).
I've pushed to the thyrsus gcc-conversion repository the rest of my
work from last year, including a few changes to the attribution map
and a post-processing script.
It has occurred to me that for the period since the creation of
gcc.gnu.org we might just use @gcc.gnu.org addresses (which are likely
to forward) rather than try to nail down everyone's current address.
But using the address from the ChangeLog sounds better.
> One thing my software can do now that it couldn't do six months ago
> is mine Author fields from ChangeLog histories. So you'll get a
> better-quality conversion than if I had been able to finish this then.
Excellent.
Jason