From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:17:03 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] svn commit: trunk/buildroot/package/dbus In-Reply-To: <1233485886.5742.4.camel@elrond.atmel.com> (Ulf Samuelsson's message of "Sun\, 01 Feb 2009 11\:58\:06 +0100") References: <20090131225336.4E3377621A@busybox.osuosl.org> <20090201055814.GA8215@cloud.net.au> <87zlh6is7q.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <1233485886.5742.4.camel@elrond.atmel.com> Message-ID: <878woqi9f4.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Ulf" == Ulf Samuelsson writes: Ulf> ?As long as you allow a commit to the main tree without Ulf> testing by others you will have a problem. Ulf> I have proposed to go to git, but that was not of interest Ulf> until the uclibc project did so. Who says it's not of interest? I'm pretty sure the general agreement is that we'll move to git sooner or later, and the same was discussed during the uclibc.org reinstall. Back then we had more urgent issues to handle, and not all is taken care of yet (E.G. issues from the old bugtracker, the commit mails are still using the wrong URLs and so on). Just getting git up and running is easy (hey, it's installed on uclibc.org so we could have it NOW), it's all the extra things like gitweb/cgit, commit messages to the mailing list, a maintainers system with submaintainers and an agreed upon procedure for finally getting changes in the official (E.G. mine) tree. A lot of these infrastructure issues would be shared with busybox/uclibc as well, so it makes sense to sync. But we can certainly discuss how to handle the BR specific procedures so we're ready (either here on the list or IRL at FOSDEM). -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard