From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3790 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2013 21:16:00 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 3767 invoked by uid 89); 20 Aug 2013 21:16:00 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 3 recipients Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (HELO mail-vc0-f176.google.com) (209.85.220.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 21:15:59 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ha11so724967vcb.35 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:15:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.177.35 with SMTP id cn3mr148065vdc.46.1377033357139; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.19.40 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:15:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8738q4gj7a.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> References: <8738q4gj7a.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 21:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: A Proposal to Move to Git From: Andrew Pinski To: Tom Tromey Cc: GDB Development , Binutils Development , newlib@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I'd like to move gdb and binutils from CVS to Git. I've done much of > the preliminary work and I will do the remainder, including the > inevitable follow-up bug-fixing. Since newlib is part of the same repo, it would make sense to split out newlib the same way you are splitting out gdb and binutils. Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > I've read all the previous threads on the topic. I think I have > internalized the big issues but it is possible that I am missing > something. I'm sure you'll let me know. > > > I think we should move specifically to git for two reasons. First, it > is obviously better than CVS for the majority of work. Second, point > #1 is borne out by observing that most active gdb developers are > already using git. (I can't speak for binutils developers, though I > do my rare binutils forays in git as well.) > > > One principle I'm following in this proposal is to make the minimal > change possible. That is, I want to focus on the conversion to git. > Often times these discussions veer off into other process changes -- > removing ChangeLogs, stuff like that -- but for this change we ought > to concern ourselves solely with the rollout of git, and leave other > changes for a later date. > > So, if you have other changes you want to propose, I would appreciate > it if you would hold them until the transition is complete. > > Note that there are even some absurd cases of this I am leaving > in-tree; for example the requirements, obsolete with git, to put a > date into a branch name. > > > The basics of the plan are as outlined by Joseph Myers: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-03/msg00486.html > > For the purposes of this discussion I think you can focus on 6.b -- a > shared gdb+binutils repository. > > The reason for a shared repository is simply that binutils and gdb > share a substantial amount of code, mainly BFD, but other things as > well. > > This gives the change minimal impact. It is not zero impact, but: > > 1. It is superior for all of us to build the whole tree, to avoid > those (rare) occasions where BFD changes break other parts of the > build; > > 2. You can already build just a subset of the tree; > > 3. This affects just the regular developers, not releases. > > > I have been using http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14768 > to track the to-do items. > > My understanding of the task list is: > > * Update the gdbadmin scripts. > I've done this though I have not tested them. > > * Update the BFD daily date-updating commit. > Not done. > > * Port log_accum_bugzillafied to git and set up git commit email. > I've done this and tested the post-receive parts. > > * Update DJ's script that auto-merges some changes from GCC. > Note that I think it will have to continue to merge to the 'src' CVS > repository, for the benefit of projects left behind. > Not done. > > * Examine gdb and binutils documentation to see what needs to be > updated. This means looking at the texinfo manuals, the web sites, > and the gdb wiki. > I have patches for this. > > > Once the infrastructure bits are in place, there is the matter of the > conversion: > > * Convert the tree. We can perhaps reuse parts of the existing > conversion process for this. I will try a test conversion at least > once. Since the old history is available > (see http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2012-10/msg00407.html), > we can try to merge it before conversion. > There seem to be several approach we can take here. I am > investigating the options, but I'm interested in your expert > advice. > > * Mark the various converted directories as read-only in CVS. > This can be done via the commitinfo file. > > > I'd like to do the final switch around mid-September. Not sooner, > because I am going to be away for a little while near the end of > August, and I want to be available to fix problems. > > Tom