Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration

[Adam Fedor]

On 2005-10-18 18:36:23 -0600 Andrew Ruder <address@hidden> wrote:

> > * Gna.org's hosting service has been nixed more or less by most.  I
>   don't think that this is worth pursuing because of the overall
>   negative response.

I've think I've forgotten - why was gna.org nixed? The reason I ask is 
that I talked to RMS and surprisingly, he's not opposed to us moving 
the repository if we really want to, although he would prefer us going 
to gna.org. He does not like sourceware.org


We should also talk about all the implications this might involve. For 
instance, the current CVS archive at savannah will still be there, so 
we have to inform people about that.

Plus we can't say, 'just update from CVS' to everyone who has a 
problem anymore. Most people won't have svn, even if they knew how to 
do that stuff. We need to update things like the daily snapshots.

I wonder if we could still mirror the repository on CVS? Either at gna 
or savannah. Even if it is read-only.

I'm still not sure I want to leave savannah, but they're so 
understaffed, it seems like it could be a long long time before they 
have a useful system working.