Re: Git cvsserver serious issue

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 09/22/2010 10:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we're going to let people in by IP address, maybe we could let legacy
>> buildfarm members in by IP address. It doesn't seem particularly
>> helpful to expect each buildfarm owner to solve this problem for
>> themselves. I'd also note that if they could run git locally, they
>> wouldn't be needing cvsserver in the first place.

> I'm not convinced we need any such thing yet. 13 of the 38 animals that
> have reported in the last 5 days are using git already (OK, factoring
> out my animals that's 8 out of 33). I'm going to send out email in a few
> days prodding people to migrate. Let's see how far we get.

Even if we get 100% compliance on the buildfarm side, Peter's already
stated that moving the NLS support over to git is going to take more
time than we have available right now. We need a cvsserver for awhile
yet. We can't just suddenly announce "CVS service is terminated as of
yesterday" and expect that that's not going to have any serious
consequences.

Is there anything we could do to patch the problem out of git-cvsserver?
Maybe hack it to only accept requests for the active branch tips?

regards, tom lane