On Mon, 2019-12-16 at 11:29 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > Should we go with the gcc-reparent.git repo now? > > I think we should go with the reposurgeon conversion, with all Richard's > improvements to commit messages. gcc-reparent.git has issues of its own; > at least, checking the list of branches shows some branches are missing. > So both conversions can still be considered works in progress.
I thought we would pick the best available conversion today. If we keep tweaking the conversions till they are "perfect" we probably never reach that point. > However, we should also note that stage 3 is intended to last two months, > ending with the move to git > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-10/msg00143.html> > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-11/msg00117.html>, and given that it > didn't start at the start of November as anticipated in the originally > proposed timetable, that implies corresponding updates to all the dates. > By now, enough people are away until the new year that now isn't a good > time for deciding things anyway. The idea was to do it while most people were away to have the least impact. The timeline https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GitConversion does say we can slip for logistical reasons the read-only date (2019/12/31) by a few days. Do people really want to keep tweaking the conversions and postpone the git switchover? What would the new timetable be then? Cheers, Mark
