From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Biesinger Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ignore commits for which cvsps can't identify a branch Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 23:02:11 +0100 Message-ID: <43ED0D63.5090105@web.de> References: <200602102102.k1AL2Xkd010415@biesi.no-ip.org> <7vmzgyvrih.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 10 23:02:22 2006 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1F7gLN-0006eW-00 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 23:02:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932220AbWBJWCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:02:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932223AbWBJWCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:02:17 -0500 Received: from smtp08.web.de ([217.72.192.226]:18319 "EHLO smtp08.web.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932220AbWBJWCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:02:17 -0500 Received: from [85.124.17.142] (helo=[192.168.1.4]) by smtp08.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (WEB.DE 4.105 #340) id 1F7gLE-00073U-00; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 23:02:12 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20060209 SeaMonkey/1.5a To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vmzgyvrih.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Sender: cbiesinger@web.de Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > Does continuing with this kind of "fixups" produce usable > history, perhaps just some changes missing but trees contained > in other commits are still faithful reproductions of what the > CVS repository would have given you? Or does it result in > unusable history? I have to admit that I can't actually tell you for sure, since I still get a failure later (I think it's because cvsps orders changesets wrongly). However, I was told that the revisions that give me this CVSPS_NO_BRANCH issue came into existence by (partially) removing tags from a file, so not listing them should be fine, I think. (This happened by copying a ,v file and removing its tags, simulating a file copy) Anyway, based on that, I expect that the history is the same as what I get from cvs, but I can't verify that. > Depending on the nature of corruption and its expected use, > sometimes silently corrupt conversion result is worse than not > having it at all. Well, without the patch this error is fatal, and the conversion is very partial. I'm not sure if that's better. (This is also not "silent" corruption. I do show a message for it. Would you rather have it displayed unconditionally?) Would it be better to have a flag --continue-on-errors?