I've finally been able to convert all extras package modules/branches (from
FC3 and up) to git, much in the same layout as dist-hg (each release "branch"
being its own standalone repo (complete with inherited history from devel/
branch at split time))
I haven't yet started modifying Makefiles and plague to handle getting a
checkout of a package from a tag and building it. That will probably come
Some interesting comparisons:
Time to convert from CVS to GIT:
Time to convert from CVS to HG:
Size of dist-git (with full repack -a -d):
Size of dist-hg (no extra processing):
None of the above are really deciding factors in what to use, just some
interesting anecdotal observations.
Release Engineer: Fedora