Rasmus,
We've kinda moved away from the problem in hand. Moving the entire
repository over to svn doesn't make it any easier to know when someone
commits something that should be merged and doesn't merge it. It also
doesn't do anything to resolve the relationship between PHP branch
releases and PECL extension development. Both issues now will need
thinking through in svn terms as well as in cvs terms, if they're to be
resolved at all.
Two weeks doesn't sound long enough.
Well, the problem is that if the work involved to do this is in any way
CVS-specific, it will be throw-away work once we move away from CVS,
which is inevitable.
I agree entirely - that's exactly what I meant by 'thinking through in svn
terms as well as in cvs terms'.
What we don't know at this point is the lifespan
of CVS. I'm unmotivated to do anything with SVN with the major 1.5
release coming up in a month or two. But if someone else is gung ho
enough to volunteer sooner and has an eye on 1.5 to make sure the stuff
will be compatible with the new release, perhaps things can move quicker.
Given that this entire thread came about because at least two of the core
team don't have time to deal with merging to HEAD, that doesn't seem very
likely. But you're right to put an end to quick-fix and possibly
cvs-specific solutions. Does svn even support validation scripting? Does
anyone even know without checking?
Lukas was onto a good thing with his idea of moving less challenging areas
of the CVS repository to SVN first IMHO. It'll make the task of moving the
difficult ones less horrendous, and it'll give some idea of the problems
likely to be encountered in adoption (if any).
- Steph
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
