On 27/12/2007, Martin Marques <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Whether migration to Git is on its way, I can't tell. The Fedora Wiki > > feels like a labyrinth and is slow to search. Switching Fedora Package > > Ahhh, they are looking to migrate the wiki as well. :-) > > MoinMoin is hell. It's not just the Wiki software that makes the Fedora Wiki increasingly unpleasant to use. It's also the page layout and structure. Somebody has had the brilliant idea to use tables with narrow columns on the main pages, such as "Fedora Packaging". Not! -- Finding relevant pages is too difficult. > > CVS to another SCM system is a controversy for several years. Whenever > > I think you are confused. Nope. I've followed many of the related discussions, from early evaluation of CVS for the Fedora Extras package collection to the tiresome threads on fedora-maintainers list. The people who have tried to replace cvs in favour of their own favourite scm/vcs, have yet to agree. > The migration is for internal, but public, use. Eh? I don't understand that sentence. There's nothing "internal" about replacing the scm system that will affect hundreds of contributors. > Specifically to maintain > revision of packages (spec files) of Fedora That's what current /cvs/pkgs is all about. But there has been /cvs/fedora for other projects, too. > and maybe also of Redhat in general. "Maybe" is a guess. Several decisions on infrastructure changes come from inside of Red Hat and are pushed through the Fedora Project Board without resistance. > You will always find packages of CVS, Subversion, git, Mercurial, > Monotone, Bazaar, etc. in Fedora so there shouldn't be any controversy. Uhm, the mailing-list archives (e.g. fedora-maintainers) disagree. > I hope I was clear. No.
