Hi,
Martin Langhoff wrote:
cvs2svn has all the "wtf-did-cvs-mean-by-that" algorithms that are
very hard to write and maintain, and it seems to be the best one at
that. Of course, it also writes SVN repos -- but I'm sure that's the
easiest part.
We don't need no meta VCS for any of this.
Sure, we certainly need a meta format of some sort (not a full blown
VCS, agreed, but somehow we need to represent commits, tags and
branches). And IMO, the subversion based format is not a good one,
because it treats branches and tags very different from most other
systems (and from what it should be from a users perspective: an atomic
operation).
We (Michael, Oswald and me) have discussed joining efforts of my cvs to
monotone converter, but I quickly dropped that idea because the cvs2svn
converter is too subversion specific. If cvs2svn wants to become a
universal cvs importer, it needs to get rid of those assumptions (and do
more work to unify tagging and branching).
Regards
Markus
-
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
