Re: CVS -> SVN -> Git

[esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond)]

Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>:
> For example, cvs2svn internally deduces which files should be added to a
> given branch in a given commit.  But the information cannot be output to
> SVN in that form.  Instead, cvs2svn has to figure out which
> *directories* to copy to the branch directory, then which files to
> remove from the copied directory (because they shouldn't have been
> tagged), and which other files to copy from other sources.  This extra
> work, which is quite time- and space-consuming, is worse than pointless
> when converting to git, because git has to invert the process to figure
> out which individual files have to be tagged!

OK, that's a fair point.  I might have known the showstopper would be
somewhere near Subversion's tags-are-directories assumption.  And this
also neatly explains why I didn't see any problems or poor performance
during my recent conversions; the projects I was lifting had no tags.

> The interface between the two halves does not necessarily need to be a
> serialized data stream; it could just as well be via the Python API that
> is used internally by cvs2svn to access the reconstructed commits and
> supporting databases.  This would require the second half to be written
> in Python, but otherwise would be very flexible and would avoid the need
> to find a be-all serialized format.

Or...wait for it...the generator for the serialized format could be one
of the back ends!   Probably a good idea to have for debugging reasons, 
if nothing else.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>