From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Schiltknecht Subject: Re: CVS -> SVN -> Git Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:02:07 +0200 Message-ID: <469F52BF.8050300@bluegap.ch> References: <469804B4.1040509@alum.mit.edu> <46a038f90707132230n120e6392uaf5cd86ff10b6012@mail.gmail.com> <4699034A.9090603@alum.mit.edu> <20070714195252.GB11010@thyrsus.com> <46994BDF.6050803@alum.mit.edu> <20070715013949.GA20850@thyrsus.com> <46a038f90707151805j454b57fbvb4d7ed526e1e64ce@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: esr@thyrsus.com, Michael Haggerty , Julian Phillips , git@vger.kernel.org, dev To: Martin Langhoff X-From: dev-return-2065-gcvscd-dev=m.gmane.org@cvs2svn.tigris.org Thu Jul 19 14:02:41 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvscd-dev@gmane.org Received: from sc157.sjc.collab.net ([204.16.104.146] helo=tigris.org) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IBUiN-0000yd-Ds for gcvscd-dev@gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:02:39 +0200 Received: (qmail 4510 invoked by uid 5000); 19 Jul 2007 12:02:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cvs2svn.tigris.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cvs2svn.tigris.org Received: (qmail 4496 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2007 12:02:37 -0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAJbvnkZYxjr4/2dsb2JhbAA X-IronPort-AV: i="4.16,556,1175497200"; d="scan'208"; a="62465807:sNHT63489811" X-IRONPORT: SCANNED User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070607) In-Reply-To: <46a038f90707151805j454b57fbvb4d7ed526e1e64ce@mail.gmail.com> Archived-At: Hi, Martin Langhoff wrote: > cvs2svn has all the "wtf-did-cvs-mean-by-that" algorithms that are > very hard to write and maintain, and it seems to be the best one at > that. Of course, it also writes SVN repos -- but I'm sure that's the > easiest part. > > We don't need no meta VCS for any of this. Sure, we certainly need a meta format of some sort (not a full blown VCS, agreed, but somehow we need to represent commits, tags and branches). And IMO, the subversion based format is not a good one, because it treats branches and tags very different from most other systems (and from what it should be from a users perspective: an atomic operation). We (Michael, Oswald and me) have discussed joining efforts of my cvs to monotone converter, but I quickly dropped that idea because the cvs2svn converter is too subversion specific. If cvs2svn wants to become a universal cvs importer, it needs to get rid of those assumptions (and do more work to unify tagging and branching). Regards Markus