From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28082 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2009 19:18:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 28072 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jun 2009 19:18:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:18:07 +0000 Received: (qmail 10851 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2009 19:18:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 19 Jun 2009 19:18:06 -0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MHjbA-0005op-RD; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:18:04 +0000 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:18:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Tom Tromey cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Samuel Bronson Subject: Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <87r5xgqk0k.wl%naesten@gmail.com> <20090619162308.GA13968@caradoc.them.org> <20090619162801.GA14773@caradoc.them.org> <20090619163753.GA9700@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090619164943.GA16137@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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/msg00202.txt.bz2 On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Tom Tromey wrote: > One idea I had is to have an "infrastructure" repository holding > top-level configure, plus libiberty and include. Then, gcc, src, > cgen, cygwin, etc would simply merge from this repository. And, we'd > have a rule: no local changes. That's no local changes to these files on the development mainline of all but the one repository. Release branches still need to be able to have changes to them. If the separate repositories solution is chosen, it is not necessary for all projects to convert at once, or even to convert to the same system; having set up the infrastructure arrangements (and I think GCC as master for those files would work just as well as a separate repository) individual projects could move away from CVS (disallowing HEAD commits on their parts of the CVS repository) when convenient to them. For example, if we still wish to integrate the older binutils and GDB history when converting those projects, other projects would not need to wait for that history to be made available. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com