"Belcourt, K. Noel" <kbelco@sandia.gov> writes:
I'd much prefer to leave the repo structure unchanged and migrate directly into git "as is". Restructure the repo into submodules after we've made the transition to git. It will be much easier to restructure the repo with everything already in git. There's two upsides, we lose no commit history and it only perturbs one aspect at a time (first give people chance to use same repo layout using new tool, followed by a restructure of the repo into submodules using the new tool). I worry about perturbing too many variables at once.
A few of us have been discussing this at length off-list. There are arguments on both sides, so I can't say which is truly best except I think we may prefer to get all this disruption over in one big step: 1. Move to Git, preserving monolithic history in a "boost-history" repo. 2. Separate the projects into submodules governed by a "boost" super-project. 3. Switch to CMake as the build process for these submodules. We could certainly stagger these changes -- and there are advantages to doing so -- but it means damaging the Boost development process in a big way on three separate occasions. That would really hurt progress, I think, more than getting it all over with at once. Also, you will not lose any commit history. Even when we move to submodules, there will always "boost-history" to represent exactly the state of Subversion on the date we made the change. We should probably even keep a read-only Subversion repo around for a while, just in case. John