Re: Report: removing the inconsistencies in our CVS->git conversion
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Report: removing the inconsistencies in our CVS->git conversion |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinG6gyZ4rbuaVx1ySdhSAvu-fUr+kzw+-Jit=Wi@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Report: removing the inconsistencies in our CVS->git conversion (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Report: removing the inconsistencies in our CVS->git conversion
Re: Report: removing the inconsistencies in our CVS->git conversion |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >>> Magnus posted an updated conversion this morning. >> >>> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=postgresql-migration.git;a=summary >> >>> Evidently, however, he didn't do the same things you did, because >>> there are DEFINITELY more than 9 manufactured commits in this one. >> >> Um ... I just did >> git clone git://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql-migration.git >> and I only see nine. It's got some *other* problems though; compared >> to a conversion I just finished locally, it's missing a whole lot of >> history for some of the old jdbc files. >> >> Is there any possibility that "git clone" isn't very trustworthy? >> It's a bit scary that we don't see identical views of this repository. > > *scratches head* > > I did a git-fetch into an existing copy of the old contents of that > repository, rather than a fresh clone. Let me nuke it and start over. OK, the fresh clone does in fact show just 9 manufactured commits. Sorry, I must not have cleaned out the old state properly. What's the problem with the old JDBC files? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: