This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: A Proposal to Move to Git
- From: Fred Cooke <fred dot cooke at gmail dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>, Steve Ellcey <sellcey at mips dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, GDB Development <gdb at sourceware dot org>, Binutils Development <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:39:38 +0200
- Subject: Re: A Proposal to Move to Git
- References: <8738q4gj7a dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <1377099478 dot 5770 dot 76 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey> <52161D32 dot 3090604 at arm dot com> <20130822142513 dot GH5147 at adacore dot com>
Using two systems in parallel seems to be a terrible idea. One nice
thing with Git is that the release branch, once imported, could be
practiced on locally for honing the new process.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Joel Brobecker <email@example.com> wrote:
>> If you switch after the releases have been made you also need to
>> consider how you'll handle 'dot' releases should they be necessary. Are
>> they going to come from the CVS source base and then be re-imported into
>> GIT? Or, are you going to use a different process to handle them from
>> that used to produce the main release?
> It's a good point. I thought we'd keep using CVS for 7.7.x while
> transitioning to git for "HEAD". On the other hand, I like Tristan's
> confidence, so I'd be OK with switching to git before we create
> the 7.7 branch. Also, why force ourselves to use two systems, one
> of them being phased out, when we can use just one?