Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT

[Maxim Kuvyrkov]

> On Dec 27, 2019, at 4:32 AM, Joseph Myers <jsm@polyomino.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 26 Dec 2019, Joseph Myers wrote:
> 
>>> It appears that .gitignore has been added in r1 by reposurgeon and then 
>>> deleted at r130805.  In SVN repository .gitignore was added in r195087.  
>>> I speculate that addition of .gitignore at r1 is expected, but it's 
>>> deletion at r130805 is highly suspicious.
>> 
>> I suspect this is one of the known issues related to reposurgeon-generated 
>> .gitignore files.  Since such files are not really part of the GCC 
>> history, and the .gitignore files checked into SVN are properly preserved 
>> as far as I can see, I don't think it's a particularly important issue for 
>> the GCC conversion (since auto-generated .gitignore files are only 
>> nice-to-have, not required).  I've filed 
>> https://gitlab.com/esr/reposurgeon/issues/219 anyway with a reduced test 
>> for this oddity.
> 
> This has now been fixed, so future conversion runs with reposurgeon should 
> have the automatically-generated .gitignore present until replaced by the 
> one checked into SVN.  (If people don't want automatically-generated 
> .gitignore files at all, we could always add an option to reposurgeon not 
> to generate them.)

Removing auto-generated .gitignore files from reposurgeon conversion would allow comparison of git trees vs gcc-pretty and gcc-reparent beyond r195087.  So, while we are evaluating the conversion candidates, it is best to disable conversion features that cause hard-to-workaround differences.

> 
> I'll do another GCC conversion run to pick up all the accumulated fixes 
> and improvements (including many more PR whitelist entries / fixes in 
> Richard's script), once another ChangeLog-related fix is in.


--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org