Hi List
I have two questions
Koji can support SVN at the moment?
why not?
Oscar Palma Linux Mexico
On Thursday 28 June 2007 18:33:59 Oscar Victorio Calixto Bacho wrote:
Hi List
I have two questions
Koji can support SVN at the moment?
Not currently.
why not?
The source control mechanism used by the Fedora project for it's packages is currently CVS. It also looks like that any move away from CVS would be toward a distributed SCM such as git or hg due to the things a distributed SCM offers over CVS/SVN.
However patches to Koji that enable svn support won't be turned away, provided they're good (:
On Sat, 2007-06-30 at 14:48 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thursday 28 June 2007 18:33:59 Oscar Victorio Calixto Bacho wrote:
Hi List
I have two questions
Koji can support SVN at the moment?
Not currently.
why not?
The source control mechanism used by the Fedora project for it's packages is currently CVS. It also looks like that any move away from CVS would be toward a distributed SCM such as git or hg due to the things a distributed SCM offers over CVS/SVN.
However patches to Koji that enable svn support won't be turned away, provided they're good (:
There are patches for Koji attached to this ticket:
https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/koji/ticket/15
I can't comment as to the quality, as I haven't tested them...
Jeff
On Sat, 2007-06-30 at 21:33 -0500, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-30 at 14:48 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thursday 28 June 2007 18:33:59 Oscar Victorio Calixto Bacho wrote:
Hi List
I have two questions
Koji can support SVN at the moment?
Not currently.
why not?
The source control mechanism used by the Fedora project for it's packages is currently CVS. It also looks like that any move away from CVS would be toward a distributed SCM such as git or hg due to the things a distributed SCM offers over CVS/SVN.
modifications are required to your Makefile.common to support svn. as you may know, switching to svn eliminates the make tag step in the build process. i can email you the Makefile.common i'm using if you need it.
However patches to Koji that enable svn support won't be turned away, provided they're good (:
There are patches for Koji attached to this ticket:
https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/koji/ticket/15
I can't comment as to the quality, as I haven't tested them...
i posted an updated patch against koji 1.2.2 here: https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/koji/attachment/ticket/15/koji-1.2...
they work for me; i'll let others judge their "quality".
rob.
On Monday 02 July 2007 10:23:44 rob myers wrote:
modifications are required to your Makefile.common to support svn. as you may know, switching to svn eliminates the make tag step in the build process. i can email you the Makefile.common i'm using if you need it.
Curious, do you no longer have a reference to the module at the time the build was done? While a cvs tag is convenient to tell the buildsystem what bits to pull, a named tag in general is convenient for humans to easily get the content at that point in time too.
On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 10:26 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Monday 02 July 2007 10:23:44 rob myers wrote:
modifications are required to your Makefile.common to support svn. as you may know, switching to svn eliminates the make tag step in the build process. i can email you the Makefile.common i'm using if you need it.
Curious, do you no longer have a reference to the module at the time the build was done? While a cvs tag is convenient to tell the buildsystem what bits to pull, a named tag in general is convenient for humans to easily get the content at that point in time too.
For subversion, a path plus a revision number would be sufficient. Tags in subversion are really just a convention. Unless you put some code into a pre-commit hook to prohibit it, tags can be modified just like any other directory in subversion. Unfortunately the same can be said of CVS tags.
Jeff
On Monday 02 July 2007 10:49:54 Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
For subversion, a path plus a revision number would be sufficient. Tags in subversion are really just a convention. Unless you put some code into a pre-commit hook to prohibit it, tags can be modified just like any other directory in subversion. Unfortunately the same can be said of CVS tags.
Yes, I'm wondering why suddenly it would be not necessary to provide this convenience to developers, so that they'd have to guess at which path/rev# was used to build a particular nvr.
On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 10:51 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Monday 02 July 2007 10:49:54 Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote:
For subversion, a path plus a revision number would be sufficient. Tags in subversion are really just a convention. Unless you put some code into a pre-commit hook to prohibit it, tags can be modified just like any other directory in subversion. Unfortunately the same can be said of CVS tags.
Yes, I'm wondering why suddenly it would be not necessary to provide this convenience to developers, so that they'd have to guess at which path/rev# was used to build a particular nvr.
we have only svn revision numbers. noone here seems to miss the nvr tag. in other words, it is a convenience we haven't really needed or used, and of course YMMV.
rob.
buildsys@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Jeffrey Ollie -
Jesse Keating -
Oscar Bacho -
Rob Myers