I'm wondering how many people are there still using parsecvs to to track a live CVS tree? I've been using it for a while at work to track a rather monster CVS repository. The main reasons are: 1. It's the fastest import I've come across so far. Given the size of the CVS repo other solutions took far too long to do the conversion 2. It's simple to configure (if you can call "find" configuring), assuming you have access to the CVS repo proper 3. It reliably regenerates the repository so you can run the entire conversion from scratch the next day and hapily pull into working repos (I assume if I got tother working they should exhibit this property). However I have come across a few problems. One of which involves files not getting put into branches which I've managed hack a band-aid solution for that involves ignoring date discrepancies. However having mailed keith he made it clear he doesn't use it any more having converted his stuff so it's currently not being actively maintained. So the question really is are there people out there still using it? If not I'll hang up my code exploring boots and have another go at whatever is considered the best in class iterative CVS to GIT gateway. If it's still a useful tool for other people as well I'm happy to delve deeper into the code and seeing if any of the crinkles can be ironed out. It's interesting to note from the Git Users Survey 2008 that CVS is still the second most used legacy version control system. One could draw the conclusion that having a well supported bullet proof incremental CVS import mechanism as part of git should still be a fairly important goal. There are a lot (too many?) out of tree solutions out there which makes approaching the task somewhat daunting when first coming to git. -- Alex, homepage: http://www.bennee.com/~alex/ -- 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
