Re: differences between old clone and new Re: git-svn performance

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hin-Tak Leung <htl10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> To compare the old clone with the new, I did:
> 
> git branch -r | sort | xargs -n 1 git log --decorate=full -n 1
> 
> It turned out other than the empty vs 3 word commit messages
> about two years ago on trunk (which are inherited in all the newer
> branches), there are two other groups of differences.
> 
> One branch on the old clone has an extra merge from trunk (
> and some extra trunk commits) listed in 'git log', while
> another branch has the exact opposite - on the old clone
> has one fewer merge.
> 
> I see the merge seem to be genuine - the subversion log
> often says so e.g. "ported from rXXX from trunk", but
> the extra/missing pattern isn't consistent.

So both merges are correct, but we lose one, and gain one?
I'll try to check more closely tomorrow.  Can you point out
the exact revisions in the R repo?  Thanks.

> So the histories are largely the same, except due to the 
> extra merge, don't have the same sha1 sums.

--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]