From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1614 invoked by alias); 2 Jan 2010 19:08:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 1598 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jan 2010 19:08:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-173-76-52-118.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (173.76.52.118) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 02 Jan 2010 19:07:59 +0000 Received: from ednor.cgf.cx (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id D597213C0C7; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 14:07:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id CDC702B35A; Sat, 2 Jan 2010 14:07:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2010 19:08:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker , binutils@sources.redhat.com, "Joseph S. Myers" Subject: Re: time to be serious about dropping CVS Message-ID: <20100102190741.GA8480@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker , binutils@sources.redhat.com, "Joseph S. Myers" References: <20100101080137.GP2788@adacore.com> <20100101141806.GP548@adacore.com> <20100102181134.GB7365@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100102181134.GB7365@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 01:11:34PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 06:18:06PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>Thanks for the suggestions! >> >>> Do not try to plan a transition for the whole src repository. Try to plan >>> one for GDB and Binutils together at most [*], on the basis that other >>> projects such as Cygwin and Newlib should choose their own version control >>> systems in their own way and at such times as are convenient to them. >> >>I would be happy with such an approach - in fact, I think that makes >>the task easier too, since we'd have fewer groups to coordinate. > >Although I'd like to move Cygwin to git, I really and sincerely think >that making Cygwin part of the source tree for gdb and binutils is a >historical mistake. I'd love to rectify it. Hmm. On rereading the "Although" above doesn't really belong there since I was just expressing my support for the idea. Sorry for the lack of clarity. cgf