[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] beginner needs advice

From: John A Meinel
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] beginner needs advice
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:26:01 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)

Laurent Wandrebeck wrote:

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:43:13 -0600
John A Meinel <address@hidden> wrote:

Thx for your reply John, and sorry for the delay of the answer, these days
are quite busy ;)
About PQM, the only i'm aware of is arch-pqm. Are there others ?
Ever heard of a perforce->arch gateway ? i.e., there's a bkcvs for
the kernel. We could use that for sorcery, as a perforce->cvs gw
exists, but losing changesets would be a shame...
The only PQM I know of is arch-pqm, and I haven't used it. I just have read the posts, and understand what it is for. I believe Andrew Suffield is the one who worked on it.

Well, I believe there are no plans for a bk->arch gateway because of the restrictions from bk. (If you use bk you are not allowed to work on another source control system.) I think that is only for the free version. So if you *pay* a few $k, then maybe you could work on the gateway.

As far as perforce->cvs->arch, I believe cscvs (change-set cvs) at least tries to extract changesets from cvs. I think it uses stuff like common log messages and check-in times, etc. It's still under development, and I think it's been a while since it had a full release, but you might look into it. If the gateway can create things that look like changesets in cvs, then you might not lose anything.

However, I would also say that if all these projects are open source, it might not be that bad to get the source, and do your own modifications.

It wouldn't seem that hard to setup a source tree that was under both perforce and arch. (It's how I did my cvs/arch "gateway").

You could then setup a cron job that would look for updates from perforce, check them out one at a time, and commit them to arch. It isn't a straight gateway, and is less than optimal, but it *is* likely to work.

You would likely want 1 tree for each branch in perforce, which may become an administrative overhead. But without a good tool for branches (like arch) most people don't generate that many branches. I know I used to try and keep a dev branch, but because cvs doesn't handle the multi-merge problem very well, I always re-merged to head, and then created a new branch. So there were only 2 live branches at any one time. With arch, it's very easy to scale to *many* live branches. Esp. since tla now requires submission branches, I have maybe 5 small branches that exist.

I hope I didn't tell you more than you wanted to know,
I've got the feel one never knows enough about tla :)
(except Tom and a couple other old hackers on it of course;)
Yeah, it does feel that way sometimes.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]