From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Parkins Subject: Does git-cvsserver expect all changes to be via CVS? Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:37:11 +0000 Message-ID: <200701261037.13948.andyparkins@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 26 11:37:47 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HAOSk-0006mE-R0 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:37:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751437AbXAZKhS (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 05:37:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751037AbXAZKhS (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 05:37:18 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]:12394 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437AbXAZKhR (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 05:37:17 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so681023uga for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:37:15 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=mJ96fVCIU1R/TjZYXNucYV3lwPlZ8GN6bNdeQE48R9rdSnYBOInXERGErpwhQqco8VCOEOQzzbQZTpXRuDRSSVtUgcCRy35D8Pn4nXzhZyRtwyM0YilZpw5VAVxlLK5Ephs9G0ycMuf8Y966sfj0WEWrhByWCtR0pKemAkjDGno= Received: by 10.67.119.9 with SMTP id w9mr4119990ugm.1169807835645; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:37:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from davejones ( [194.70.53.227]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 29sm3522921uga.2007.01.26.02.37.14; Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:37:15 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hello, Still messing around with git-cvsserver. It's behaving very strangely, and it occurred to me that I have not appreciated that there might be a limitation in it. Here's what I did. * CVS user checks out a branch from the repository * CVS user adds new directory and files * CVS user checks them in * git user updates a tracking branch and then working branch to match latest * git user makes changes to same files * git user checks in and pushes the branch * CVS user runs cvs update CVS user can't see the changes; forced updates simply checkout the same files he's just checked in. I deleted the sqlite table from the git repository and ran the CVS update again and this time the changed files arrived (but only after a forced update). My question then is: does git-cvsserver require that all changes go via itself? Does it expect you not to use normal git on that repository any more? Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE andyparkins@gmail.com