This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: gdb.git mirror is broken
On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Jim Meyering wrote:
> No pressure from me.
> I barely have time to help with the technical side of things,
> so if you want someone willing to invest in advocacy I'm not your man.
I don't want advocacy, but *technical design*. Technical design based
around showing how common tasks translate to a proposed new system,
existing scripts are converted and common errors are made harder.
Technical design that demonstrates that the usual tasks for people making
occasional changes are at least as easy and intuitive as now. Technical
design that shows how the breakage that is the subject of the present
thread will not be possible in the proposed system. (No doubt it will
also make additional things possible for version control experts, but the
people proposing designs need to think in normal user terms.)
Personally I think a single repository for GDB and binutils together, with
configure options for building only one or the other, might be a
reasonable approach (with other projects left to move from CVS or not at
their own choice and in their own time), but that's not the level of
design needed here; it doesn't even address how to handle gdbtk. For
shared toplevel files, libiberty etc., I think it would be reasonable to
do things in a DVCSly pure way and have no master repository and scripts
automatically merging commits from one repository to another (possibly
using a different version control system), or to declare GCC the master
for all files present there and disallow non-automatic commits to the
shared files on the mainline of other repositories. But a detailed design
would need to demonstrate such scripts working in practice.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com