This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: hg conversion notes and summary
- From: Jonathan Larmour <jifl at jifvik dot org>
- To: Alex Schuilenburg <alexs at ecoscentric dot com>
- Cc: ecos-maintainers at ecos dot sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:21:39 +0100
- Subject: Re: hg conversion notes and summary
- References: <4AD32231.email@example.com> <4AD5E3C1.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
FWIW, 261 sites cloned http://hg-pub.ecoscentric.com/ecos/ or downloaded
eCos from hg in the first 48 hours from the first public download. Not
quite firefox or linux standards, but then we are not talking about a
consumer item (the source, that is). I was quite pleasantly surprised
by the number and apparent level of interest. It is a good argument
against anyone who thinks eCos is dead.
I confess to also being (pleasantly!) surprised by that number. Of course
that doesn't necessarily mean they're using hg rather than importing into
a different DRCS, although that's probably more likely.
It also raised something I did not think about. As people look like
they are using the repo already, there is a good argument for also
providing patches through the mechanisms hg provides. I would be
interested to know whether you are still sticking with email, or whether
you intend to start using bugzilla, since I could start work on a
template to give you maintainers some idea of what support you should
expect from your DRCS in the provision of patches and contributions. hg
has both email and bugzilla support, BTW :-)
We're currently involved in some other discussions. There's a good chance
we might want to get back to you about some bugzilla munging if you don't
mind, so please do hold the thought.
I would also look to preserve the changeset IDs if you were to convert
from hg to git, or if you chose hg, clone rather than export/import, so
as not to inconvenience those who have already started using the repo.
If that doesn't have any drawbacks I don't see why not.
As an aside, I am glad people are finding it useful - makes my efforts
worthwhile and feel appreciated. Even more, I am very pleased our small
Dell SC1425 did not appear to blink - hgwebdir.cgi is better than I
As a matter of interest, what version of hg are you using? sourceware
claims to be running "5c95d7667dd1" presumably because it's a custom
build, but I have no idea how to compare that with what you may be using.
I note the file dates are Nov 7 2008 though, for what that's worth.
I also see an hgext dir with the same date, including bugzilla.py, notify.py.
If we do make a decision to move to hg, we'll need to know if there would
be any problems using that version, and so whether I'd need to agitate
towards moving sourceware to something more recent (which isn't
straightforward as other projects use hg too).
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine