From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Wong Subject: Re: [PATCH] git svn clone -s was not prefixing 'branches/' Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:24:39 -0800 Message-ID: <20090118012439.GA31969@dcvr.yhbt.net> References: <1232050647-2870-1-git-send-email-snowblink@gmail.com> <20090117105427.GA15801@dcvr.yhbt.net> <751e526a0901170339m6471ac84tdb032a090d19d7c6@mail.gmail.com> <20090117120723.GA24549@atjola.homenet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Jon Lim , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 18 02:26:07 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LOMQQ-00071k-Jd for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:26:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756881AbZARBYl convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:24:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756484AbZARBYk (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:24:40 -0500 Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net ([64.71.152.64]:42149 "EHLO dcvr.yhbt.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756168AbZARBYk (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:24:40 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.2.5]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D9F1F794; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:24:39 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090117120723.GA24549@atjola.homenet> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Bj=F6rn Steinbrink wrote: > On 2009.01.17 11:39:28 +0000, Jon Lim wrote: > > Hi, > >=20 > > Maybe this patch doesn't fix the problem I was having. I will attem= pt > > to describe it better here. > >=20 > > I understand that a standard subversion setup is as follows: > > trunk > > branches > > tags > >=20 > > With the -s option, svn clone should expect this. > >=20 > > Using the example subversion repository: > > trunk > > branches/RB_1.0 > > branches/RB_2.0 > > tags/REL_1.0 > > tags/REL_2.0 > >=20 > > Currently, using the -s option you get: > > trunk > > RB_1.0 > > RB_2.0 > > tags/REL_1.0 > > tags/REL_2.0 > >=20 > > I think it makes sense to have: > > trunk > > branches/RB_1.0 > > branches/RB_2.0 > > tags/REL_1.0 > > tags/REL_2.0 >=20 > Why? "trunk" is just a branch like any other branch, too. It's basica= lly > just a svn convention that it's not in branches/ but in its own > "toplevel" directory. Once imported into git, it's just an ordinary > remote tracking branch. It's already pretty well distiguishable from = all > the other branches due to its name. Yup, you said it better than I could myself :) > What _does_ make sense is to have a common prefix for all the stuff y= ou > got from svn, using for example --prefix=3Dsvn/. That way you get: > svn/trunk > svn/RB_1.0 > svn/RB_2.0 > svn/tags/REL_1.0 > svn/tags/REL_2.0 >=20 > The important part is that those names aren't ambiguous if you have > local branch heads called, for example: > trunk > RB_1.0 > RB_2.0 >=20 > as the svn/ prefix is part of the shortname for the remote tracking > branches. So "trunk" is the branch head and "svn/trunk" is the remote > tracking branch. >=20 > Btw Eric, is there any reason why there's no prefix used by default? > Using the name for the svn-remote as the prefix would make a lot of > sense to me. Backwards compatibility; and that I've been lazy :) But I do agree that prefixing "svn/" is preferred for tracking new repos. I seem to recall that git-svn was actually the first user of th= e "remotes/" namespace before it was adopted by the rest of git, and with SVN, I didn't anticipate more than one remote. --=20 Eric Wong