| 1 |
Dnia 2014-10-03, o godz. 20:00:24 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Starting a new thread for discussion: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > Dnia 2014-10-01, o godz. 13:30:55 |
| 8 |
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 11 |
> >> > If you'd like to contribute another agenda item, please reply to this email. |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> I'll offer up a further topic for the git migration. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > I think that there are a few issues that the Council may actually want |
| 16 |
> > to discuss. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I was thinking of an additional item also worth consideration. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> So far the general plan has tended to be that we would do a full |
| 21 |
> historical git migration, and the last commit would just be the active |
| 22 |
> tree, which would then be further cleaned up (remove cvs headers, |
| 23 |
> changelogs, switch to thin manifests, etc). |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I was thinking that it might make more sense to just make things |
| 26 |
> really simple and ONLY migrate the active tree into the starting git |
| 27 |
> repository. That is, basically take the rsync tree, remove metadata, |
| 28 |
> and do a git init. (Then follow that up with removing changelogs, |
| 29 |
> cleaning up cvs headers, and so on.) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Not rsync, 'cvs up -dP [-kk]'. rsync has a lot of cruft and out-of-repo |
| 32 |
experiences. Using cvs directly gives us better guarantees about match |
| 33 |
between full conversion & snapshot. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Michał Górny |
Archives