On Nov 19, 2010, at 06:12 PM, Georg Brandl wrote: >Am 19.11.2010 15:46, schrieb Barry Warsaw: >> On Nov 19, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >>>- date SVN will go read only >> >> Please note that svn cannot be made completely read-only. We've already >> decided that versions already in maintenance or security-only mode (2.5, 2.6, >> 2.7, 3.1) will get updates and releases only via svn. But only the release >> managers should have write access to the svn repositories. > >Really? I can understand this for security-only branches (commits there will >be rare, and equivalent commits to the Mercurial branches can be made by >others than the release managers, in order to keep history consistent). > >But having the maintenance branches (by then, that will mostly be 2.7 because >3.1 will go to security-only mode soon) in SVN will be a burden for every >developer, since they have to backport bugfixes from Hg to SVN...
Maybe I misremembered Martin's suggestion, and he was only talking about security releases. I think the key thing is whether you're going to backport the vcs related bits to stable releases. I plan to only do releases for 2.6 from svn, because it's not worth breaking things like sys.subversion, and as you say the number of commits will be small. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
