Steffen Prohaska wrote: > On Jul 8, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Robin Rosenberg wrote: >> Corecode's fromcvs is pretty fast and incremental and AFAIK >> accurate. I had >> plenty problems with cvsimport, but fromcvs keeps in sync with the >> CVS repo. >> Get it at http://ww2.fs.ei.tum.de/~corecode/hg/fromcvs/ . >> >> It does not convert regular tags, only branches, however so there >> is something to >> do for those that want a complete cvs import. > > Did anyone compare > * git-cvsimport with cvsps patches from [1] > * parsecvs [2] > * fromcvs > and can give a recommendation? > > My experience with plain git-cvsimport (without cvsps patches from [1]) > is that it has a lot of problems. I'd recommend not to use it for > incremental import and be very suspicious about the git repository > created by git-cvsimport. You need to carefully validate the repository. > It's likely that you need to fix imported branches. The trunk seems to > be ok. I've used both parsecvs and git-cvsimport, and I can definitely say from experience that cvsimport badly munges history, and parsecvs seems to handle it correctly. parsecvs does have the limitations that it requires the ,v files and doesn't work incrementally, making it great for project repository conversions and painful for just wanting to use git on a CVS-(mis)managed project. I've never used fromcvs. One idea to mitigate one of the limitations: how about modifying the CVS server to add an extension that supports downloading full ,v files? CVS has had server extensions in the past, such as for ls/rls. Once support for this extension makes its way out to most CVS servers, this problem goes away. - Josh Triplett - 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
