Let me preface everything with the comment that there is a checklist
already partially prepared on this...

http://slony-wiki.dbitech.ca/index.php/Move_to_PgFoundry_Checklist

Jim C. Nasby wrote:

>On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:16:10PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
>  
>
>>On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Chris Browne wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>There may be other things I'm not thinking of; that's why this is a
>>>Request For Comments :-).
>>>      
>>>
>>Well, is moving to svn such a critical thing?  It seems that unless  
>>we're doing many branches and many vendor drops and such, cvs is  
>>sufficient for now.
>>
>>The mailing lists could move at any time.  It would probably be a  
>>good opportunity to get rid of the cruft on the list by having  
>>everyone re-subscribe.  No matter how good a mailing list manager is,  
>>there are always dead addresses that accumulate after a while...  If  
>>we could arrange it that every existing member got an invitation to  
>>just click a link that would be ideal.
>>    
>>
>
>I disagree. First, if there are invalid emails subscribed, who cares?
>  
>
It'll irritate them.

This is a nice way of eliminating cruft; those that ARE interested are
free to subscribe to the new list; those that aren't can be silently
dropped, which is probably better for all.

>Second, by creating new lists, you'd lose the archives of everything
>that's been discussed, which seems like it would be a huge loss.
>  
>
That's a separate issue that is a good point.

Addition to the checklist:

"Draw a copy of the existing archives; if nothing else, they may be
added, as a set of files, to pgFoundry so that old email archives are
not lost"

Actually, taking a peek at this, "wget -r" is your friend...

The command "wget -r
http://gborg.postgresql.org/pipermail/slony1-general/" pulls the
archives fairly successfully in TWO forms:
1.  As the set of HTML files,
2.  As a set of "mbox-style" data.

I'll bet this is pretty easy to redeploy on pgFoundry...

>  
>
>>Moving over the history of the bug tracker DB is important.  We don't  
>>want to lose any institutional memory.  /me wonders if it could be  
>>scripted with WWW::Mechanize....
>>    
>>
>
>I believe that a script to do that exists. I've been pushing for the
>creation of a project on pgfoundry for the migration, so that stuff can
>get posted and people can help.
>  
>
I'm not convinced that automating bug tracker transfer is *all* that
necessary.

We only forcibly need to bring over the items that aren't closed, and
there are only 64 of those.  If four of us split them up, we can
doubtless handle it in an afternoon.

And note that we'd use considerably *better* statuses; I don't think
that an automated conversion would be all that successful

>If there is such a script then I suspect we might actually be close to
>being able to seamlessly migrate projects. There shouldn't be any issue
>with moving mailing lists, SVN exists (and worst-case a seperate install
>of viewcvs could be setup until there's native gforge support for SVN),
>and I believe everything else is in the database.
>  
>
Aside from "general popularity," it is not evident that we Really
Absolutely need to migrate to SVN.

If we stay with CVS, then we could get the "bonus" that we could fairly
much copy the files verbatim to pgFoundry, and not lose anything at all...