Yann, I want to see if we can close these gaps. Have you got a public repo that shows this problem so can look more into it? On 5/28/06, Yann Dirson <ydirson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As a sidenote, I'm wondering why there is no precise information on the branchpoint in "cvsps -A". I guess the semantics are "fork a new branch from the ancestor one" at whatever point it currently is - that would look quite risky to me, and could be part of the reason why cvsps did not notice the inconsistency: it just did not try to find out where the new branch was to be grafted exactly.
It is perfectly possible for cvs to branch at a "point" that is not really a patchset/patchlevel. Just like it is to tag something that has never been a patchset. It is something we currently fudge a bit (or a lot, depending on your point of view). If the branch was made on a checkout with an inconsistent tree, we cannot really represent that in git matching what happened in CVS. OTOH, the cvsps output you are showing us seems to be in the right order... patchset 20 should go on top of patchset 3... is cvsimport truly mishandling this? martin - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html