This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>
- Cc: Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim dot kuvyrkov at linaro dot org>, "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <esr at thyrsus dot com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:53:35 +0000
- Subject: Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT
- Ironport-sdr: DCX9ZI2pGUdCI64QopJ6X4xtcFrmXTnL05U72S6ikrNwnbFS59hIX/dMLW3MW+oeoihsj6Y6KB Ih+L/Fac+uQJDAm1t/hwt1icf+21HghW0broUlR5eX3aIerU0mo+MCCLkhwwCKIGdQ8ZQ0eSko jpZZxuEEnjTD/IPQfuZJTfjf8Z8RYrp7n/hAacp8z5KYqVcWDVGFAvL6FtNSqPguiBw/HuYWOH VvLrpr4yth7MvKDjV+a83jcPfSKO3ATg7gtOOtCy5UeonaKIcChelhiJ5LCfO4DX/h0Pjsp6BK BWk=
- Ironport-sdr: bkl0MFLIrhrDf8JRgRrQcTm91Soei5E0Hq5bNSa3LynrrLDf+GNK4gGIV0g0ObDJ04S6OQtGLj VKI1FMWKOT47RcWwssZ+dlIL4diBHf34PIjMxJoxl188Fg5RMzH/SkgLS7cdaN7XGIWW4+0+q7 NoFVg48BXSSkLaGZzr59+9CIAoO0AQNseA7mOmc1wp9qvFcuJ3A+tGLNLwTR75qyBgbdLd7h5V dCvn6ka1z7Io56awgbjEPdam+WGiTL6h7WUZyPd70T8n6r4z/rAH6LAaI0V7YT2BsotJiOXc5L gAk=
- References: <1685e719-738f-dd4e-c39c-c08e495b202e@arm.com> <9E009921-96EA-44A2-A06A-232711227E69@linaro.org> <BEB3D1BD-86C3-4B1A-A1BB-62461A7DCAD8@linaro.org> <da35e7b40c21d0b880199143cc4b64a393368e8d.camel@klomp.org> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1912161117300.3352@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <a6b5dfe3b66b18c371c3d891c23277d96c8798dd.camel@klomp.org>
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > I think we should go with the reposurgeon conversion, with all Richard's
> > improvements to commit messages. gcc-reparent.git has issues of its own;
> > at least, checking the list of branches shows some branches are missing.
> > So both conversions can still be considered works in progress.
>
> I thought we would pick the best available conversion today.
> If we keep tweaking the conversions till they are "perfect" we probably
> never reach that point.
There is a difference between tweaking until they are perfect, and
allowing a little more time to get major improvements for which code
actually exists (Richard's commit message scripts).
If the go port of reposurgeon were still unfinished, or there were major
problems with the conversion that weren't understood, considerations might
be different. But the go port is fully functional and all the known
issues affecting tree contents are fixed; to the extent there are other
issues, they are less significant and also well-understood and should be
fixed soon.
> > However, we should also note that stage 3 is intended to last two months,
> > ending with the move to git
> > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-10/msg00143.html>
> > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-11/msg00117.html>, and given that it
> > didn't start at the start of November as anticipated in the originally
> > proposed timetable, that implies corresponding updates to all the dates.
> > By now, enough people are away until the new year that now isn't a good
> > time for deciding things anyway.
>
> The idea was to do it while most people were away to have the least
> impact. The timeline https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GitConversion does say we
> can slip for logistical reasons the read-only date (2019/12/31) by a
> few days.
It was also that doing it at the end of stage 3 would mean the least
disruption to development for stage 3. That suggests converting over the
weekend of 18/19 January, given the current stage 3 timings.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com