Re: time to be serious about dropping CVS

["Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

Since you sent this to the GDB and Binutils lists, I'll just repeat one 
point from my previous comments, which are all in the list archives.

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.  
Thus you should operate on the basis that the shared toplevel files will 
always need merging between multiple repositories using multiple version 
control systems, simply because the various projects using them are 
independently run and should not be constrained to use a single system.

My suggestion is to handle the shared toplevel files in a DVCS-pure way - 
no one master repository, changes committed to any repository get merged 
to the others automatically.  But a separate master for them with all 
commits to them in the trunk of other repositories being rejected unless 
marked as merges from the master would be reasonable as well - as long as 
you don't constrain the repositories all to use the same VCS.

[*] I leave open the question of whether Insight is considered part of GDB 
here - though making it a GDB branch rather than something present on the 
trunk might be a possibility with a VCS with better merging than CVS.  I 
consider sim part of GDB here.  I consider the cpu/ directory as part of 
binutils (necessarily, as the source code of some binutils files), but 
cgen/ as a separate project.  I do not think there should be tcl/ and tk/ 
directories in the new GDB repository.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com