From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Vilain Subject: Re: Update on SoC proposal: git-remote-svn Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:34:32 +1200 Message-ID: <4BC42C98.6010006@vilain.net> References: <1271136573-sup-5613@kytes> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sverre Rabbelier , David Michael Barr , Git Mailing List To: Ramkumar Ramachandra X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 13 10:34:45 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O1bZy-0004O3-RK for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:34:43 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752160Ab0DMIeh (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Apr 2010 04:34:37 -0400 Received: from bertrand.catalyst.net.nz ([202.78.240.40]:60550 "EHLO mail.catalyst.net.nz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751551Ab0DMIeg (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Apr 2010 04:34:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC57732FDF; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:34:33 +1200 (NZST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at catalyst.net.nz Received: from mail.catalyst.net.nz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bertrand.catalyst.net.nz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HadYYbEkCNiY; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:34:32 +1200 (NZST) Received: from [IPv6:2404:130:0:1000:21d:7dff:fe90:5fe0] (unknown [IPv6:2404:130:0:1000:21d:7dff:fe90:5fe0]) (Authenticated sender: samv) by mail.catalyst.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A435532FDB; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:34:32 +1200 (NZST) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) In-Reply-To: <1271136573-sup-5613@kytes> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> Hi Ramkumar, I've looked at this proposal and seen that it differs a >> bit from the version on the list, and I can't see the relevant >> discussion, so I'll just throw my bit in here - though note this is a >> technical comment and not a critique of your proposal. >> > > There's been a lot of discussion, some on the list, and some more off > the list. > Right, that will be why :-). No problem, apologies for not catching the earlier discussion. It's good to hear that you have collectively reached a very similar design to the one indicated from my perforce importer experiment (SVN is of course, a poor imitation of Perforce in many ways). >> Anyway like I say, please follow-up on the mailing list, and this >> advice can receive wider scrutiny. >> > > Thank you for your valuable comment! > No problem at all. I will watch the development of this project with interest. All the best, Sam