xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving from oss.sgi.com to kernel.org

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving from oss.sgi.com to kernel.org
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 15:14:35 -0500
Cc: fstests@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140807000922.GA26465@dastard>
References: <20140807000922.GA26465@dastard>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 8/6/14, 7:09 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Hi folks,

<rationale>

> It should be no surprise that since this conversation I've been
> looking at what is involved in moving everything XFS off oss.sgi.com
> to kernel.org.  Right now I have the main XFS repositories up to
> date on kernel.org.  For userspace I've simply pushed the current
> trees and tags to the pre-existing repositories here:
> 
>       git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsprogs-dev.git
>       git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsdump-dev.git
>       git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git
> 
> These trees currently have the same content as the trees on
> oss.sgi.com.  I may rename these as a result of discussions here
> (e.g. some people don't like the -dev suffix on the trees) so it's
> best for people to continue to use the trees on oss.sgi.com until
> this disucssion comes to a conclusion.

I agree with the move to kernel.org; they have paid staff with time
and resources to look after this stuff; it's a resource we should use,
and it'll save us all time and/or money.

But I'm one of the "some people" who don't want to re-use the -dev
trees; let's just get properly named repos up there.  These served
a different purpose, long ago.

If you want to rename to fstests, that's ok with me, but that's
potentially a different scope; depending on how much content in
the tree needs to be updated etc, I could see doing that a bit later
if needed.

If/when you get the names truly settled, let me know and I'll help
with updating the wiki etc if you like.

As for the old tarballs - they do claim to be signed, right?  So
if we can verify their identity, I see no harm in keeping them around.

As for mailing lists, is it possible to forward for a while, and
also send a reply back about the address change?  That might be most
foolproof, then eventually stop the forwarding and just add a reply
about the list move, and leave that there until oss crumbles into
dust.  ;)

Thanks, and "May the source be with you" ;)
- -Eric
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=nbLn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>