On Aug 21, 2007, at 5:12 PM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 11:56:11AM +0000, David Watson wrote:Now, I'm not sure this is 100% the fault of git-svn. Perhaps keeping its metadata about which SVN branch it's connected to isn't the best thing, but git-merge is doing exactly what you ask for. Perhaps we need a merge command in git-svn that does the right thing? Although what that right thing would be, I'm not quite sure. Either way, there needs to be a BIG GIGANTIC WARNING in the git-svn manual that if you actually use git for what it claims to be great at (i.e., merging) you may be in for a world of pain, with your coworkers and boss coming at you with pitchforks and torches. Especially because there areso many git users who need to interoperate with SVN.IMHO here is what git-svn should do. It should use the not-so-newremotes mechanism, and have all the svn remotes branches under a remote namespace, clean, simple, and also knowing which "upstream" svn "thing"it's following.
Isn't what git-svn already does if you git-svn clone with `-T trunk - b branches -t tags'? At least in my git-svn repositories I do see the SVN branches as remote branches with `git branch -r'
-- Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna EPITA Research and Development Laboratory
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
