I agree on the approach. I'm concerned about moving over to SVN for a few reasons: duplication of accounts (however most of the WG already have or will need sourceware.org accounts), harder merging (with bzr you do a 'bzr merge lp:gcc' and it does a good, three way merge with trunk. Last time I used svn for this it was a mess), needing write approval (perhaps mitigated by having our own /linaro playground), and making our code easy for third parties to find.
One approach would be: * Work in svn://trunk while in stage 1 * Work in svn://linaro/trunk while in stage 3 * Keep lp:gcc-linaro as our consolidation branch * Use the Launchpad lp:gcc import to make merging the changes into the consolidation branch easier This keeps development upstream and keeps the consolidation branch in the same place. Andrew, could you contact the sourceware overseers, introduce us, ask about the account policies, and getting a linaro directory for us to work in? -- Michael On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Ira Rosen <ira.ro...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 8 November 2010 20:30, Chung-Lin Tang <clt...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >> >> Still, I would like to see a 'linaro-trunk' branch under >> svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/branches. It would actually serve a different purpose >> than a LP branch; the LP GCC 4.6 would probably eventually turn into Linaro >> 4.6, while a SVN branch would be a preparation for re-merging into mainline >> trunk when 4.7-stage1 opens. Also, for the GCC community, a SVN branch would >> probably be more convenient. >> >> We can have our patches submitted to gcc-patches, and have it reviewed >> under the usual [patch, <branch>] format, rather than the odd condition >> where we ask for approval, then accumulate in an outside repository. > > > On 8 November 2010 20:17, Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> > wrote: >> >> I agree. One option that Andrew suggested at the meeting was to put the >> branch in GCC SVN instead of Launchpad. That sounded like a good idea >> to me. It's usual (maybe even expected) that people who maintain their >> own SVN branches post the patches they're committing to gcc-patches, >> so I don't think we could be accused of spamming the list or asking for >> anything inappropriate. >> >> I just have a feeling that having an SVN branch would go more smoothly >> than posting patches to the list but maintaining them elsewhere. > > > I also think that an SVN branch is a better idea than Launchpad, and I agree > with both Chung-Lin's and Richard's arguments. _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
