From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7272 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2009 16:23:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 7223 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jun 2009 16:23:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:23:11 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B30010D6B; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:23:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AD610D65; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:23:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MHgrs-0003j8-5b; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:23:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:23:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Samuel Bronson Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ? Message-ID: <20090619162308.GA13968@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Samuel Bronson , gdb@sourceware.org References: <87r5xgqk0k.wl%naesten@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r5xgqk0k.wl%naesten@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00194.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:13:31PM -0400, Samuel Bronson wrote: > Hi. I'm wondering what the reasons are that GDB is still using CVS. > In other words: what work must be done in order for it to be possible > to switch it over to Git or Bzr? Two things. One is a compelling reason to switch. (This is not an invitation; there's plenty of discussion of this in the archives. Personally I'd be happy to switch, but I'm easy to convince plus having it in CVS is a real nuisance for me.) The other thing is the combined src repository, which is shared between many projects including binutils, newlib, cgen, and gdb. I think we need to either decide to split them up and manage the shared directories specially, or come up with a clever way to fake CVS-style modules. Or else give up and make people check out the whole thing, which might drive projects out into a new repository anyway; a src checkout is bigger than anyone needs. There was another discussion of this on the binutils list recently. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-05/msg00028.html -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery