On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 5:41 PM Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim.kuvyr...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On May 16, 2019, at 7:22 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 5/15/19 5:19 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >> > >> For the official converted repo do we really want all (old) > >> development branches to be in the > >> main git repo? I suppose we could create a readonly git from the > >> state of the whole repository > >> at the point of conversion (and also keep the SVN in readonly mode), > >> just to make migration > >> of content we want easy in the future? > > I've always assumed we'd keep the old SVN tree read-only for historical > > purposes. I strongly suspect that, ignoring release branches, that > > non-active branches just aren't terribly interesting. > > Let's avoid mixing the two discussions: (1) converting svn repo to git (and > getting community consensus to switch to git) and (2) deciding on which > branches to keep in the new repo. >
I'm hoping that there is still community consensus to switch to git. Personally speaking, a +1 to switch to git. regards Ramana > With git, we can always split away unneeded history by removing unnecessary > branches and tags and re-packing the repo. We can equally easily bring that > history back if we change our minds. > > -- > Maxim Kuvyrkov > www.linaro.org >
