similar to: [LLVMdev] CVS Branches To Discard?

Hi Reid, > A deficiency in the cvs2svn script causes it to bloat the Subversion > repository (significantly, as in 10x) in the conversion of branches > and tags. It's probably a bit late in the day, but have you considered other CVS to SVN conversion tools, e.g. Tailor? http://www.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor http://darcs.arstecnica.it/tailor/ Cheers, Ralph.

Reed, Can the "see" branch be renamed "SVA", for Secure Virtual Architecture? This is the new name of the LLVA system and project. It uses LLVM as the instruction set and compiler infrastructure. Thanks, --Vikram http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~vadve http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ On Apr 2, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Reid Spencer wrote: > All, > > We are considering removing some

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 13:30 -0500, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Reed, > > Can the "see" branch be renamed "SVA", for Secure Virtual > Architecture? This is the new name of the LLVA system and project. > It uses LLVM as the instruction set and compiler infrastructure. Yes, we can do that. I'll add it to the conversion script. > > Thanks, > >

Just wondering: Is there any plan to move to svn? I would love to have a diff command that works when I am offline :-) Best Regards, Rafael

Rafael, On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 16:05 -0300, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > Just wondering: Is there any plan to move to svn? I would love to have > a diff command that works when I am offline :-) Its been discussed from time to time. I would like to see this as well, but for an additional reasons: simpler branch management and faster updates, etc. SVN handles directories better and merging head

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Bill Wendling wrote: > Perhaps someone could come up with a list of different versioning > software, list the pros and cons, and then we could vote? (Has anyone > mentioned Bitkeeper yet? :-) There are a couple reasons we are using CVS still: 1. CVS works and is well understood by all involved. 2. The main deficiencies of CVS don't impact us much (we aren't

Hi Chris, > 2. The main deficiencies of CVS don't impact us much (we aren't > hampered by lack of atomic commits, renames, and better branch > facilities). If people would like to see the logical `patch set' that made up a CVS commit then cvsps may be useful, or, as others have said, use Tailor to convert to a local repos. in your preferred format.

Hello, Scott. > the official cutover. Granted, you might need darcs to pull the current > version out of its repo, since it was originally designed with darcs in > mind. I can confirm, that tailor converts LLVM CVS with all history preserved to mercurial repository without any visible troubles. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint

Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >>the official cutover. Granted, you might need darcs to pull the current >>version out of its repo, since it was originally designed with darcs in >>mind. > > I can confirm, that tailor converts LLVM CVS with all history preserved > to mercurial repository without any visible troubles. I'm not sure if I just took HEAD or converted the

On 11/27/06, Scott Michel <scottm at rushg.aero.org> wrote: > Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > >>the official cutover. Granted, you might need darcs to pull the current > >>version out of its repo, since it was originally designed with darcs in > >>mind. > > > > I can confirm, that tailor converts LLVM CVS with all history preserved > > to mercurial

http://dovecot.org/test/ Sorry for not answering any questions for past two weeks, I'll try to get around answering them in next few days. I've also been thinking about if I should switch from CVS to Darcs. It seems to be exactly the kind of reversion control tool I had wanted to use. Anyone have comments for or against it? I'd still have read-only CVS repository generated from

> I'm not sure if I just took HEAD or converted the whole llvm repo. > Personally, I like darcs for the atomic theory of patches. YMMV. I have used darcs to work with psi. It looks like a very clean design, but currently it is a very anemic implementation IMHO. I constantly find myself trying to find out how to do a relatively simple task. Git is fast and has a lot of features, but

Perhaps someone could come up with a list of different versioning software, list the pros and cons, and then we could vote? (Has anyone mentioned Bitkeeper yet? :-) -bw On 11/28/06, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm not sure if I just took HEAD or converted the whole llvm repo. > > Personally, I like darcs for the atomic theory of patches.

Hi, in my path of getting the controls sample to work nicely, I fixed some classes on the way, see the attached diffs. I had some difficulties, but could track down all stupid bugs and am now almost happy with the code :) (I had the complete ImageHandler hieracy implemented at some time, but than I discovered the error was not in unloaded ImageHandlers but in the controls-program which does not

Hi everyone. I''m choosing an SCM for my current Rails project. Up until now, for my other (non-Rails) codings, I used Darcs and liked it very much. I''d prefer to use Darcs for my Rails development as well. Looking into the matter, I''m somewhat deterred by the appearant dominance of Subversion as the SCM tool of choice for Rails hackers. Is there a technical reason for

I''m a bit new to working on a rubyforge/sourceforge/open source project, so excuse my obliviousness. What is the preferred way of submitting a patch to wxruby? Thanks, Nick

Calling all rails darcs users! We may be in the minority, but I''m sure we can still share some know how here. Question: how are you managing your vendor/rails directory? svn externals seems to be the preferred option for svn folk (at least this is the approach recommended in the Agile 2 beta). Is there a way to get the same functionality within darcs? That would seem to be the

Hi, as our repository has now been switched to SVN I have stopped my darcs-mirror. Is anyone still interested in the darcs mirror? I would have to set up a new one for the SVN then, since I can''t reuse the history of the CVS import. If no one requires the darcs mirror, I would just trash the darcs repository and reactivate it if need arises. In other news, I have some small fixes for

Dear All, according to http://llvm.org/SVNMigration.html the repository migrated to SubVersion (svn) on june 5th 2007 (almost 10 days ago). Did the migration happened as expected? http://llvm.org/releases/ still mention CVS, and nothing on http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#checkout suggest to switch to svn instead of cvs. What is the current best way to download the latest snapshot:

I didn't see anything on http://llvm.org/SVNMigration.html, but I'm assuming that llvm/projects has moved to llvm/examples. Is that correct? If so the documentation in http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html will need to be updated. In particular, the getting started doc talks about checking out llvm-test to llvm/projects. Also, I'm curious why the llvm/projects/sample