Re: The Big Switch to Git

[Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>]

() Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net>
() Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:16:23 +0000

   > It would be nice to have workbook and guile-scripts as peers of
   > guile-core, since that forms the minimal set to reproduce "cvs
   > checkout hack" of yore.  (Basically, the cvs-module "hack"
   > included only those three cvs-modules.)

   I'm not aware that this "hack" collection has been doing anything for
   us recently.  At least, it's true that guile-core does not currently
   depend on workbook, as it did once.

It's only value would be for history browsing.  Granted, that history is
shallow; interest quickly moved away from the non-guile-core cvs modules.

   I'm sure there is stuff in workbook and guile-scripts that is still
   useful, but I prefer to import it lazily (and as and when it becomes a
   priority).  That will also allow us to consider where each imported
   item should go within the Git repository.

I urge you to reconsider.  It's no big deal to import them and leave them be
(for historians).  You can even make them read-only.

   Wouldn't it make sense for guile-www to be a separate Savannah
   project?

Yes.  If Guile maintainers don't mind, i can pursue that angle.  More
precisely, i would create a Guile-WWW project on Savannah (w/ myself its
sole administrator), make a Git repo available, shutdown the gnuvola
guile-www Git repo, and post an announcement to the guile-user list.

   In case this sounds like I'm singling out guile-www, I've actually
   always had a problem understanding the structure and existence of the
   Guile CVS modules other than guile-core - and I think the fact that
   many of them are obsolete and/or bitrotted is a clue that this is a
   problem in practice.

Yes, there's a lot of hoarding of lost bits, there.  However, i think
singling out Guile-WWW is fine; it has undergone continued development,
whereas the others have not.

thi