On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Bruno Cesar Ribas wrote: > I began to think about it... the idea to have a git-svnserver is to move from > svn to git and get my dev team not to worry about the transition at the > start, but it is a good idea to make people get moving to git idea of > devlopment, right? > Or the main idea is that we will have a group devloping under git repo and a > group under svn-gateway for the same project? I don't see a point to have > this! when a repo type is defined everyone must begin to understand that way, > even if it was changed in the middle of the project. It's been useful in the past (when Wine went from CVS to git) to make it unnecessary for all developers to switch which software they're using at the same time. With that particular project, it really went from having a CVS repository and a git gateway to having a git repository and a CVS gateway without users seeing a difference (except that the CVS access was suddenly faster). Then, of course, the git users were able to start making use of the more flexible representation of history, since the official repository then could represent it. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* - 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