| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 12:09:30AM +0100, R?mi Cardona wrote: |
| 2 |
> Because atomic commits don't exist in CVS, the scripts rely on |
| 3 |
> commit/modification dates to recreate atomic commits in svn/git. |
| 4 |
> Unfortunately, in some not-so-rare cases, it can definitely mess things |
| 5 |
> up, and Gnome folks took about 6 months to get rid of these issues. |
| 6 |
You should use dates AND usernames. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Are those statements true for portage? Do they actually matter for us? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> *Conclusion* We'd need to try a migration of snapshots to see how much |
| 11 |
> load it would be to migrate gentoo-x86 from CVS onto something else. |
| 12 |
Could you please actually look at the rest of the links in this thread? |
| 13 |
Antarus did exactly this for his Summer-of-Code work. The original plan |
| 14 |
was testing migrations to SVN, GIT and Mercurial. I believe that |
| 15 |
Mercurial flunked very early, and I do not know the details. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
| 19 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 20 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
| 21 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |
Archives