438884 - Get QAC out of CVS

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Other Applications Graveyard :: QA Companion, defect, P5)

Description

[cmtalbert]

The main development is happening in trunk, which is in Hg.  QAC has historically lived in the mozilla/testing/ directory structure, which I am not certain is a part of the Hg Firefox checkout pull (it may not have even been part of the Firefox CVS pull, but I did all this so long ago I can't remember).  So, we need to decide how we want to move forward on this.  Our options are as follows:

1. Stay in CVS in the mozilla/testing directory of the 3.0 branch of the tree (1.9.0 Gecko branch technically)
2. Move up to Hg -- I think if we do this we get our own repo for QAC which is kind of cool.
3. ???? Other good ideas here ????

If we move up to Hg, then we need to ensure all the fixes from CVS get moved up there.  Due to the tree sync at RC2, I think that means that the only fix NOT in the HG tree for QAC will be bug 434584 at this time.

Please add a comment to this bug for all other bugs that will need to be moved up until we decide what to do about this issue.

I will update this bug with the state of QAC in Hg once I download an Hg tree and do some exploring either this week or next.

Comment 1

[Jay Patel [:jay]]

I vote for option 2 for a few reasons:

1. our own repo will be cool
2. it'll give us a reason to learn Hg
3. having it with the main dev tree will make it easier to get community members to join the dev effort going forward

Comment 2

[cmtalbert]

I am leaning toward moving to Hg.  However, the latest code base is in CVS, so we'll have to figure out how to sync that if we move.  Administrative detail, marking P5

Comment 3

[cmtalbert]

From a discussion with Brian today, we're considering that Hg is a bit too heavy weight, and are thinking of moving to SVN.  Mozilla has an SVN repo already.  We're thinking of:

svn.mozilla.org/projects/qac

Thoughts?

Comment 4

[Brian King [:kinger]]

(In reply to comment #3)
> From a discussion with Brian today, we're considering that Hg is a bit too
> heavy weight, and are thinking of moving to SVN.  Mozilla has an SVN repo
> already.  We're thinking of:
> 
> svn.mozilla.org/projects/qac

That would be a good location. Or:

svn.mozilla.org/qa/trunk/qac/

Your call.

Comment 5

[Brian King [:kinger]]

(In reply to comment #1)
> I vote for option 2 for a few reasons:
> 
> 1. our own repo will be cool

We'll have our own no matter where we are. Just a matter of pulling the right level.

> 2. it'll give us a reason to learn Hg

Not a good reason for the code to be there though. hg is no more difficult than CVS or other RCS systems.

> 3. having it with the main dev tree will make it easier to get community
> members to join the dev effort going forward

Possibly. It is true that more contributors have hg accounts, but setting up SVN accounts is straightforward.

SVN just seems a better fit to me for extensions like this.

Comment 6

[cmtalbert]

I think SVN makes a ton of sense.  We'll go with that.  The svn.mozilla.org tree already has a /projects directory, under which are all the recent projects which are in SVN.

So, while I think that svn.mozilla.org/qa/qac makes great sense, we might be pressed to follow convention with svn.mozilla.org/projects/qac.

I'll ask for them in that order.

Comment 7

[cmtalbert]

We're now in SVN: http://svn.mozilla.org/qa/qac
--> FIXED