Re: git-svn and repository hierarchy?

[Josef Wolf <jw@raven.inka.de>]

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 01:11:36PM -0500, Peter Harris wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Josef Wolf wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 08:02:45PM -0500, Peter Harris wrote:
> >
> >> No need to coordinate clones, aside from each clone
> >> needing to know how to work in a "commits will be rebased by upstream"
> >> type of environment (which isn't unique to git-svn).
> >
> > Hmm, what does that exactly mean?  Chances are that the reason for my
> > problem is that _I_ am the one who don't know that...
> 
> See, for example,
> http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/git/2008/8/23/3056824 and
> surrounding thread.
> 
> The consensus is "Pester upstream until they stop rebasing".
> Unfortunately, Subversion is an application, not a human, so your
> pleas will go unheard. :-) The rest of that thread contains hints for
> working with a rebasing upstream.

Thanks for the pointer, Peter!  That's a long thread with a lot of
dense information.  I'm going to read (and try to understand :),
but I guess it will take a couple of days...

> git-svn will actually never rebase anything once it is in Subversion.
> So, for example, when they say 'linux-next' in that thread, you could
> read "any branch that isn't in Subversion yet", since you know that
> branch will be rebased at least once.

At the time I read the tutorials/howtos/whatever, I thought I understand
what "rebase" actually means.  But now I get pretty much confused, since
there are "git rebase", "git pull --rebase" and "git svn rebase" involved,
and they all seem to do very different things.

> > jw@raven:/home/jw> git --version
> > git version 1.6.0.2
> > jw@raven:/home/jw>
> 
> 2beec8973 is the commit in question. Unless I'm mistaken, it first
> appeared in 1.6.1.0, so you may want to upgrade each cloneN to at
> least 1.6.1.

OK.