On Aug 3, 2007, at 6:03 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Martin Langhoff wrote:
On 8/3/07, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
cvsps is not a conversion tool at all, though it is used by other
conversion tools to generate the changesets. It appears (I hope
I am
not misinterpreting things) to emphasize speed and incremental
operation, for example attempting to make changesets consistent
from one
run to the next, even if the CVS repository has been changed
prudently
between runs. cvsps does not appear to attempt to create atomic
branch
and tag creation commits or handle CVS's special vendorbranch
behavior.
cvsps operates via the CVS protocol; you don't need filesystem
access
to the CVS repository.
100% in agreement. And though I can't claim to be happy with
cvsps, in
many scenarios it is mighty useful, in spite of its significant
warts.
The "does incrementals" is hugely important these days, as lots of
people use git to run "vendor branches" of upstream projects that use
CVS.
Me too: 100% agreement. A couple of people seem to be content to
proclaim
that their incomplete solutions are better, but in the end of the day,
they are as bad as the programs they purport to replace: incomplete.
For the moment, I help myself with tracking the different branches
individually, but there, really, git-cvsimport is as good as the other
"solutions", with the further advantage that they are actually
hackable,
and not closed to everybody outside a very small community.
I just want to add a warning. You should be suspicious of branched
imported
using git-cvsimport (which is based on cvsps). If the time the branch is
created differs from the time of the first commit to the branch git-
cvsimport
may get the branching point wrong. This introduces a race condition.
Someone
may have committed changes to a file that is later changed on the
branch. At
that point the history of the imported branch is broken and git reports
_wrong_ changesets.
I ran into this issue and abandoned the use of git-cvsimport. It's
too dangerous
for me. The testcase in [1] illustrates the problem. I still strongly
believe
the warning should be stated in *BOLD* in the documentation.
I'm not saying git-cvsimport is useless. But you should be suspicious
about
the result of the import, especially if you plan to rely on
changesets derived
from the imported repo, for example if you plan to do cherry-picking
or merging
in git; or if you plan to blame people for their stupid changes based
on what
you see in gitk (almost happend to me ;).
Steffen
[1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=118260312708709&w=2
-
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
