> -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Wong [mailto:normalperson@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: den 10 juni 2007 23:33 > To: Joakim Tjernlund > Cc: git > Subject: Re: git-svn set-tree bug > > Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 18:47 -0700, Eric Wong wrote: > > > Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > trying to do git-svn set-tree remotes/trunk..svn > > > > in my new git-svn repo I get: > > > > config --get svn-remote.svn.fetch > :refs/remotes/git-svn$: command returned error: 1 > > > > > > You need to specify "-i trunk" in the command-line > > > > > > git-svn set-tree -i trunk remotes/trunk..svn > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > I have found a bug or two. Run this script and > > see what happens ant the end. > > <snip> > > > git pull . merge > > This is a non-fast-forward merge, giving you non-linear history. git > understands non-linear history without problems, but svn does not. > > > git svn dcommit # this fails > > If you have non-linear history, don't use dcommit, use > set-tree. Linear > history is cleaner and easier to manage, which is why I recommend > format-patch/am/dcommit/rebase, and avoid using pull/merge unless it's > fast-forward. I see, I figured git-svn could work around that. So I should do a git svn set-tree -i trunk remotes/trunk..svn and then git svn rebase? That makes the git history hard to follow. hmm, is it wise to mix set-tree and dcommit in one repo? Is there a way to tell set-tree to commit the whole "merge" branch as one svn commit? If I merge the latest kernel into my tree there will be a lot of commits that I don't want in svn. Jocke Jocke - 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
