1) Yes, this move will preserve all
history of files (since we are not renaming the modules, just changing
their parent directories).
2) This probably will invalidate patches
attached to bugzillas, especially "workspace patches". Perhaps
"project patches" would be ok?
Perhaps the effect or recovery for patches
should be further investigated. Or ... we may just have to bite the bullet.
But, if anyone has any patches
that are important or "near ready",
perhaps we should get those in?
Thanks quick readers.
David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
10/23/2007 03:09 PM
Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
[wtp-dev] Need to restructure our CVS
See the above document for the reasons why ... or, the reasons why I think
it is necessary and desirable.
Initially I was thinking we'd do this "after the next milestone",
but some I have talked to said "the sooner the better". Which,
as far as I know, might be as early as after the next I-build!
So, please take a few minutes to understand the issues, and complain if
that seems too disruptive too early.
The main disruption for committers is that you will have to create a new
workspace ... and re-checkout freshly any projects you have in your workspace!
Hence, any code that "you have almost ready to check in" should
be checked in ... even if not quite released for a build this week.
Additionally, any adopters that literally build WTP will have to adjust
Also, I know there are some teams (such as VE) that have "team project
sets" that will have to be updated to pull from the new repository
Not to mention, our map files and perhaps our build will have to be modified
to find the code. I would not be surprised if we don't have good builds
for a few days while issues are sorted out.
So, it's no small chore.
Comments welcome. _______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list