Re: Policy decisions and cosmetic issues remaining for the git conversion

On 13/09/10 19:31, Tom Lane wrote:
> * If we do the above, should it be done in the existing CVS repository
> or just as part of the conversion to git?  (I suspect it'd be a lot easier
> in git.)  Similarly, ought we to fix the now-known tagging inconsistencies
> in the CVS repository, or just leave it for the conversion to deal with?

Let's leave the CVS repository as it is. I don't want to destroy the 
evidence.

> * There are a number of partial tags (tags applied to just a subset of
> files) in the CVS repository: "MANUAL_1_0" and "SUPPORT" seem to have been
> applied to only documentation-related files, and "creation" and
> "Release-1-6-0" were applied only to src/interfaces/perl5/.  I find the
> latter two particularly misleading since they have nothing to do with
> either creation of the whole project or a "release 1.6" of the whole
> project.  These partial tags don't translate very well to git, either.
> I'm inclined to propose dropping all four.

What was the purpose of these tags anyway? They don't seem useful, +1 
for dropping all four.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com