[Users] Einstein Toolkit Meeting Minutes

[Barry Wardell]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Frank Loeffler <knarf at cct.lsu.edu> wrote:

> I am curious which steps have to be manual. If this is already a problem
>  for CactusBase - how much of a problem will it be for larger
> repositories? CactusBase is probably one of the "better behaved"
> places.
>

The manual steps are to fix some minor inherent issues with the
repositories, most of which seem to be a result of the CVS->SVN transition.
I'm calling them minor as none of them affect the trunk/master branch or
any of the Cactus or ET release branches. Some examples can be seen in the
Cartoon2D repository <
https://bitbucket.org/cactuscode/cactusnumerical-cartoon2d/commits/all?page=5
>:

* There are extra branches (e.g. start, v1) which are not in any way
connected to the rest of the history. These were created by the cvs2svn
script.
* Some of the commits creating tags also introduce changes to the tree
(files). These commits were automatically created by the cvs2svn script.
* Some branches/tags (e.g. STABLE, LATEST) were not created at the same
time across different repositories. None of the ones that I encountered had
what I would useful content (e.g. having a STABLE tag pointing to some
point long in the past is not particularly useful).

The reason these steps are manual is it because they require human
intervention to determine whether the issues are important or can be
ignored.

Could you suggest an example of a more "badly behaved" arrangement?

Barry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140717/b5268a08/attachment.html