This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Issue Tracker Used? Git migration checklist.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 03:26:22PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:29:11AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Fred Cooke <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>>> I think it would be great if you have the time to work to convert
>>>> binutils and gdb to git.
>>>> The first step is this: build consensus.
>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's already mirrored in git, that to me
>>> indicates some consensus. As I see (saw?) it, the decision had already
>>> been made, the migration just needed to be finished. If this was
>>> wrong, then let's start again in the right place.
>>I think there is a substantial consensus in favor of git, yes.
>>However, as you know, there are several independent projects in the
>>src repository. And some of the src directories are directly mirrored
>>from the gcc sources. And the top level files are manually mirrored
>>back and forth between src and gcc. How do we handle these issues?
>>Personally I think Joseph is right in that we should keep binutils and
>>gdb together in a single master repository. And I suppose that we
>>could continue the existing mirroring of directories with GCC. But I
>>don't really understand how this is going to work for the other
>>repositories that use libiberty. Are we going to mirror to even more
>>places? I know this has been discussed, I just don't understand the
>>And of course the gdb and other src maintainers (newlib, cygwin) need
>>to be brought into the plans as well.
>FWIW, I've already started the work to mirror cygwin in git. You should
>be able to not worry about it as long as you can get a consensus from
Actually, sorry, mirror == migrate.