| 1 |
Dnia 2014-10-06, o godz. 07:48:26 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> >>>>> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014, Seemant Kulleen wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Libraries don't have to be sad. If the history remains in a CVS |
| 7 |
> > repo isn't that the perfect home for it in the museum of gentoo's |
| 8 |
> > history? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Having the complete history in a single repository would be much |
| 11 |
> preferable, even if that history is not perfect. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It's annoying if you search for the point when some change was |
| 14 |
> performed, only to find that the repo's history doesn't reach back |
| 15 |
> that far. I've had this issue e.g. with the Portage repository whose |
| 16 |
> history was cut off at some point. Having to change tools (from git to |
| 17 |
> cvs) in addition doesn't make it better. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I was thinking of prepending the old history via 'git replace' in |
| 20 |
the gitweb repo to allow looking back. However, that idea has |
| 21 |
the downside that users would be confused by having past commits in |
| 22 |
gitweb yet not in clones. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Kent improved my idea suggesting that we use a separate repo for that |
| 25 |
'complete history' view. That is, we would have three repos: |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
1. history.git -- with past CVS history up to conversion, |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
2. dev.git -- with history starting with conversion, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
3. joined-history.git -- dev.git with 'git replace' for history.git, |
| 32 |
that is the complete history including both pre- and post-conversion |
| 33 |
commits. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Michał Górny |
Archives