Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Dec 26, 2019, Joseph Myers <jsm@polyomino.org.uk> wrote:

> We should ensure we don't have missing branches in the first place (for 
> whatever definition of what branches we should have).

*nod*

> Adding a branch after the fact is a fundamentally different kind of
> operation

That depends on the used tool.  A reproducible one, or at least one that
aimed at stability across multiple conversions, could make this easier,
but I guess reposurgeon is not such a tool.  Which suggests to me we
have to be even more reassured of the correctness of its moving-target
output before we adopt it, unlike other conversion tools that have long
had a certain stability of output built into their design.


I understand you're on it, and I thank you for undertaking much of that
validation and verification work.  Your well-known attention to detail
is very valuable.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter   he/him   https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo
Free Software Evangelist           Stallman was right, but he's left :(
GNU Toolchain Engineer    FSMatrix: It was he who freed the first of us
FSF & FSFLA board member                The Savior shall return (true);