On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > 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.
There is a difference between tweaking until they are perfect, and allowing a little more time to get major improvements for which code actually exists (Richard's commit message scripts). If the go port of reposurgeon were still unfinished, or there were major problems with the conversion that weren't understood, considerations might be different. But the go port is fully functional and all the known issues affecting tree contents are fixed; to the extent there are other issues, they are less significant and also well-understood and should be fixed soon. > > 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. It was also that doing it at the end of stage 3 would mean the least disruption to development for stage 3. That suggests converting over the weekend of 18/19 January, given the current stage 3 timings. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
