[ANNOUNCE] fixesproto-4.0 and compositeproto-0.3

[Deron Johnson]

Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Sorry I misunderstood and relayed
the wrong information.

Keith Packard wrote On 03/15/06 18:32,:
> On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 20:31 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> 
>>On Wednesday 15 March 2006 20:23, Deron Johnson wrote:
>>
>>>Well, consider it announced. He told me today that the master source for
>>>proto/Damage, proto/Composite, and proto/Fixes is in git and that the
>>>modular CVS versions are defunct. He is in the process of transferring
>>>the lib modules for these over to git, but he's not there yet. He's
>>>working on transfering the xserver module to git first.
>>
>>No.
> 
> 
> Correct, I'm working on fixing the tools to accept our existing xserver
> CVS repository and accurately *be able* to convert it to git. When the
> tools are ready, I'll ask for input on how and when the x server
> repository should be switched over. I'm hoping to have them ready in the
> next couple of days. At that point, I'll be able to build read-only git
> repositories for the X server and let people see what the result will
> look like. I'm also hoping to get a chance to look over the recent CVS
> pserver client for git repositories so we can make HEAD available via
> pserver. I think that's crazy, but I hear there are people who are
> interested.
> 
> My import tool is generating accurate revision histories along each
> branch, but there are a few issues with discovering where branches were
> originally joined in the presense of files with disjoint sets of branch
> tags (i.e. where some files are missing branch tags). And I'm still not
> handling files in the Attic at all; I don't think that's hard, but still
> on the TO-DO list.
> 
> Ajax has asked that any potential switch wait until after the 7.1
> roll-up, which seems sensible to me. If anyone else has suggestions on
> schedules, they'd be welcome as the X server has more than a few
> committers, and we should avoid moving in the middle of some important
> projects. One immediate thought is that we should be able to remove the
> extra 'xorg' directory in the X server repository now that there is only
> one.
>