This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ?
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Tom Tromey wrote:
> One idea I had is to have an "infrastructure" repository holding
> top-level configure, plus libiberty and include. Then, gcc, src,
> cgen, cygwin, etc would simply merge from this repository. And, we'd
> have a rule: no local changes.
That's no local changes to these files on the development mainline of all
but the one repository. Release branches still need to be able to have
changes to them.
If the separate repositories solution is chosen, it is not necessary for
all projects to convert at once, or even to convert to the same system;
having set up the infrastructure arrangements (and I think GCC as master
for those files would work just as well as a separate repository)
individual projects could move away from CVS (disallowing HEAD commits on
their parts of the CVS repository) when convenient to them. For example,
if we still wish to integrate the older binutils and GDB history when
converting those projects, other projects would not need to wait for that
history to be made available.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com