Re: Tags missing from GIT mirror?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Tags missing from GIT mirror? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4BEBBB4A.8090503@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Tags missing from GIT mirror? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Tags missing from GIT mirror?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On ons, 2010-05-12 at 16:11 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> Of course, we might also find some other brokenness if we try to import >> all the tags. Also, be aware of this (from >> <http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/cvs2git.html>): >> >> Differences between CVS and git branch/tag models: CVS allows a >> branch or tag to be created from arbitrary combinations of source >> revisions from multiple source branches. It even allows file >> revisions that were never contemporaneous to be added to a single >> branch/tag. Git, on the other hand, only allows the full source >> tree, as it existed at some instant in the history, to be branched >> or tagged as a unit. Moreover, the ancestry of a git revision makes >> implications about the contents of that revision. This difference >> means that it is fundamentally impossible to represent an arbitrary >> CVS history in a git repository 100% faithfully. >> > > Right, and omitting tags was in fact one of the "features" of fromcvs > that made us use it, because any tool that tries to convert tags will > explode on our CVS tree, for reasons explained in the above paragraph. > > We have also discussed this in more detail about three times before. > > Well, yes, but I have been wondering if this has to be an all or nothing deal. How many tags can we not tie to a known tree in git? My suspicion is we can probably identify most of them quite well. If we can that would be nice. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: