Conversion to SVN

[David Romano]

On 10/07/2011 07:13, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
> it looks like I'm not the only one thinking about moving the doc/www
> repos from CVS to SVN, and other people actually have not only thought
> about it but already played around with conversions.
>
> gavin did some preliminary conversions and it turns out that we end up
> with ~50k revisions and about 650MB of changes (IIRC). There are also
> lots of weird branches, so perhaps we could size that down a bit.
>
> What I, personally, would like to see is us using the same svn repo as
> src. That means we would have to stop svn.freebsd.org for the
> conversion, turn off email sending, dump 50k revisions into it (under
> /doc and /www perhaps? where should branches/tags end up?), then turn
> everything back on.
>
> I haven't really thought that through to the end, but setting up a
> separate svn repo just seems silly to me and is another administrative
> overhead. ports might be special enough (due to sheer size) to justify a
> separate repo/machine, but not doc/www.
>
> Please discuss and share your experiments and thoughts.
I'm a new kid on the block but I'm curious why git is being overlooked 
for the new repository. Just because it's a distributed VCS doesn't mean 
that it can't be used like SVN. I started with SVN, then moved to SVK 
for a spell, and dabbled in darcs before I tried out git. In my 
experience as a developer, it's been much easier to merge changes and 
keep track of branches/tags. Branching/tagging isn't an expensive 
operation in git because git focuses on content changes, not file 
changes. Not to get too off-base, but this can *definitely* help with 
having clear documentation for a specific version of FBSD. There is 
currently a FBSD git repo for src/ and ports/ hosted on github.com if 
some developers haven't heard of it and are interested in seeing how its 
capabilities can help the FBSD community.

- David

-- 
David Romano .:. unobe at cpan.org