Hi Tom and Jonathan,
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Sverre Rabbelier wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 13:33, Tomas Carnecky <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >> To test this
> >> approach I created a simple remote helper for svn.
> >
> > I guess it suffices as a POC, but I'd have preferred to see
> > collaboration with the people working on git-remote-svn instead
> > (cc-ed).
>
> Just a quick note: if this approach gets a working remote helper
> in the hands of users faster, I'm all for it.
First off, great work on the fast-import and the remote-helper! I am
very impressed with the results.
> My only concern is the name: if it is not compatible the planned
> remote helper from the summer of code project, they should probably
> get different names. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the main
> differences are:
>
> - this is scripted and uses local svn working copy operations; the
> soc project is in C and uses remote access ("replay")
Yes, the name definitely needs to be changed. Maybe name it something
along the lines of "local-svn"?
> - this uses the nice ls-remote output etc. Ram, do you think this
> would be easy to use for remote-svn?
This is quite awesome. Yeah, I suppose we can use it for remote-svn as
well.
> So, not many differences. Maybe we can standardize the interface
> and consider them alternate implementations?
This helper can't be merged in until Tom's changes to fast-import are
ported to the current fast-import. I just hope that those changes to
fast-import don't conflict with the changes git-remote-svn will
need. Frankly, I'd rather we work towards a common goal.
-- Ram
--
To unsubscribe from this list: 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