On 9/17/19 6:02 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > At the Cauldron this weekend the overwhelming view for the move to GIT > soon was finally expressed. [ ... proposal itself ... ] So there's nothing in the proposal I would object to, nor do I object to being slightly flexible. If we need to move the transition a few days into the new year because of developer availability, that seems fine. Similarly if we want to move up the date for a decision to be made that's fine as well so long as the potentially affected parties are notified ASAP what that date is.
With the SVN repo going read-only it becomes our fallback plan in case of major unexpected problems. Joseph's recommendation for having the old objects/refs in the new repo makes a lot of sense. So if it works, it's got my support as well. Anyway, just wanted to chime in with my support for the plan and make it clear that as long as we get a conversion that is as good as or better than the mirror is now that I'll be happy :-) jeff
