[Kde-scm-interest] Sysadmin advice regarding Monolithic vs Split repositories.

[Tom Albers]

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 12:33:44 +0200, zander at kde.org wrote:
> On Wednesday 8. September 2010 12.21.38 zander at kde.org wrote:
>> Which effectively means 2 years of consensus 
>> building and rule writing is thrown away.
> 
> On IRC someone said that he was unaware there was a decision and
consensus.
> Here is the page on techbase which details our work;
> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/MovetoGit
> Note the decision being writen down there under 'How';
>   «When we move, KDE's svn repository will be migrated into several Git
>   repos,
>   all on git.kde.org. Main modules such as kdelibs and kdebase will each
>   become one repository. Projects in extragear will each have their own
>   repository. »
> 
> For people that want all the details; go here
>  http://www.gitorious.org/svn2git/kde-ruleset

And I again will point you that the fact that at least *I* was under the
impression that kde-scm-interest was a list about bikeshedding about
*which* scm we should choose. Which I really don't care about. I *never*
considered it the decision making list. I would be surprised if I were the
only one. The list is not called kde-git-implementation at kde.org, which I
would have joined right from the start.

You also misinterpret the document, it is an advise about how to do it. If
you want to go another route, that's perfectly fine, we will facilitate
that. You just need to address the problems we listed regarding reviewboard
setup, accept the fact that you can not browse the source code from the
your kword project page on redmine and all the other problems we listed.

Best,
-- 
Tom Albers
KDE Sysadmin