incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Getting to our first build
Date Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:42:26 GMT
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 06:23, Michael Stahl <mst@openoffice.org> wrote:
> On 29.06.2011 11:58, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
>> I don't think we want patches. I continue to believe we want a single
>> Hg repository with "everything", and we convert that to Subversion,
>> and then load it into svn.apache.org.
>
> if it is possible to convert HG heads to SVN branches, that would be the way
> to go.
>
> i still think it makes sense to go a step further and actually merge all
> finished CWSes into OOO340 using HG first, because that is by far the
> easiest way and doesn't have any technical pitfalls.

Right. We can let Hg tie together all of the branching that was done.
Then, we can port that over to svn for loading into the repository at
the ASF.

There are about 2000 merge commits in the main Hg repository (ie. revs
with two parents). These will need some special care. I haven't
thought much on the problem on how to represent these in svn. I don't
think it is a problem... we just need to ensure that svn:mergeinfo is
set properly.

Of course, the CWSs probably have more merge commits, but once we have
a pattern established, then we'll be fine.

I do note that the primary Hg repository has only one head ("tip").
And the one CWS that I looked at was similar. We may not have a
problem with dangling/anonymous heads.


re: OOO340 in your later email. Interesting. I've seen calls for
grabbing content from a different tag/tip/branch/whatever. It seems
that we could simply pull "all branches" and then sort out which we'd
like to call "trunk" in the svn repo. It seems that OOO340 has the
most up-to-date changes on it, so we'd make that trunk.

Cheers,
-g

Mime
View raw message