drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

[Dexter Riley]

Hello.  My group is currently using subversion on our version control server,
but would like to move to git as a client.  We are considering using
git-svn, to avoid revalidating the server software.  My question is, are
there any major disadvantages to using git-svn versus git?  I know that the
git repository would be smaller.  I'm more concerned about possible svn
repository corruption, performance when pushing large merges back to svn,
and any gotchas you might have encountered.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Ed
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/drawbacks-to-svn-server-%2B-git-svn-vs-git-server--tp25994334p25994334.html
Sent from the git mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

[Pascal Obry]

Le 21/10/2009 17:05, Dexter Riley a écrit :
> Hello.  My group is currently using subversion on our version control server,
> but would like to move to git as a client.  We are considering using
> git-svn, to avoid revalidating the server software.  My question is, are
> there any major disadvantages to using git-svn versus git?  I know that the
> git repository would be smaller.  I'm more concerned about possible svn
> repository corruption, performance when pushing large merges back to svn,
> and any gotchas you might have encountered.

Something that come to mind immediately is that you'll loose merge 
information as Subversion has linear history. I understand that recent 
Subversion versions have added some information about merges but I don't 
think git-svn handles this (I don't even know if it makes sense or not:).

If you have a single integrator you'll also loose the author name. Keep 
in mind also that git-svn is slower to get new commits from the upstream 
repository.

I've used git-svn for a while now without any trouble. And I can say 
that I won't move back to using an svn client.

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|    http://www.obry.net  -  http://v2p.fr.eu.org
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B

Re: drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

[Dmitry Potapov]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 05:19:02PM +0200, Pascal Obry wrote:
> Le 21/10/2009 17:05, Dexter Riley a écrit :
>> Hello.  My group is currently using subversion on our version control server,
>> but would like to move to git as a client.  We are considering using
>> git-svn, to avoid revalidating the server software.  My question is, are
>> there any major disadvantages to using git-svn versus git?  I know that the
>> git repository would be smaller.  I'm more concerned about possible svn
>> repository corruption, performance when pushing large merges back to svn,
>> and any gotchas you might have encountered.
>
> Something that come to mind immediately is that you'll loose merge  
> information as Subversion has linear history. I understand that recent  
> Subversion versions have added some information about merges but I don't  
> think git-svn handles this (I don't even know if it makes sense or not:).

AFAIK, SVN remembers what changesets have been merged and what are not
(on per file basis). So, it is more like cherry-pick with some automatic
tracking than git merge, and stored separately for each file in the repo.
So, I do not think it is easy to map svn merge concept to git one...

Inability to do merges mean that you have to track what changes what
branch by hands, which is very inconvenient if you have a few long
living branches.

Another long standing issue with git-svn was automatic end-of-line
conversion. It did not work with git-svn and the last time I heard about
it, it was disabled for repository created by git-svn. Probably, it may
not difficult to correct, but no one has looked at that closely....

> If you have a single integrator you'll also loose the author name.

Right... And if everyone has the right to commit then git-svn will
automatically rebase your changes during 'dcommit' on top of changes
made by other people, which means that you put into the repository a
different state than one you have actually tested.


Dmitry

Re: drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

[Tim Mazid]

Hi,

I recently migrated from svn to git as well, but I've abandoned the svn
server altogether.
What I noticed is that the merges do not show up properly when you look at
the svn repo with git. Obviously because svn doesn't track that information.
I assume that such a problem would continue if you continued using the svn
server.
Personally, i would recommend migrating to git altogether, it isn't actually
that difficult. The only issue I had was fixing up the merges.
Sorry I can't be of more help, I'm just letting you know what issues I faced
with svn.

Good luck,
Tim.


Dexter Riley wrote:
> 
> Hello.  My group is currently using subversion on our version control
> server, but would like to move to git as a client.  We are considering
> using git-svn, to avoid revalidating the server software.  My question is,
> are there any major disadvantages to using git-svn versus git?  I know
> that the git repository would be smaller.  I'm more concerned about
> possible svn repository corruption, performance when pushing large merges
> back to svn, and any gotchas you might have encountered.
> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Ed
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/drawbacks-to-svn-server-%2B-git-svn-vs-git-server--tp25994334p26093326.html
Sent from the git mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: drawbacks to svn server + git-svn vs git server?

[Matthieu Moy]

Dexter Riley <edbeaty@charter.net> writes:

> Hello.  My group is currently using subversion on our version control server,
> but would like to move to git as a client.  We are considering using
> git-svn, to avoid revalidating the server software.  My question is, are
> there any major disadvantages to using git-svn versus git?

One rather big drawback is that "git svn dcommit" has to do some
history-rewritting. In other words, if you have a local commit A in
your repository, and send it to the SVN server with "git svn dcommit",
then A is rewritten into A' (same tree content, but different commit
message at least, and maybe other details I'm not aware of). If you
use git-svn as a "better SVN client", it's not a problem, but if you
want to really use the Git part of git-svn, then this history
rewritting will break the local branches that reference your A.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/