Scope of "Vetting" milestones?

[Beman Dawes]

Are the two "Vetting" milestones intended to cover all aspects of the
conversion of the svn repo to git repos, or just the history aspect of
the conversion?

It would seem simpler if they covered of all aspects of the repo
conversion (history, branch names, etc.). Even if we ask for just a
history review, developers will also make comments about anything else
they notice, so it would seem simpler to clear all the known repo
conversion issues before asking for comments.

--Beman

[Beman Dawes]

I've gone ahead and updated the description of the "Ready for Vetting"
milestone to "Repository Conversion Ready for Vetting by Boost
Developers".

An issue, "Branch names and content should follow gitflow
conventions", has been created, added to that milestone, and assigned
to Daniel.

If there are any additional tasks that need to be completed before the
milestone is considered complete, I'd appreciate it if they were
added.

The due date for the milestone is Wednesday. Daniel, please up update
this date if it is no longer realistic.

Thanks,

--Beman

[Dave Abrahams]

on Mon Feb 11 2013, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:

> Are the two "Vetting" milestones intended to cover all aspects of the
> conversion of the svn repo to git repos, or just the history aspect of
> the conversion?

IMO you shouldn't worry about what was intended by artifacts created
before you changed the way the issue tracker is being used. Just
delete, overwrite, and/or reorganize them as you see fit.

--
Dave Abrahams