|
From: | Markus Schiltknecht |
Subject: | Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: A better approach for cvs->mtn? |
Date: | Tue, 21 Nov 2006 13:27:45 +0100 |
User-agent: | Icedove 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061116) |
Hi, Bruce Stephens wrote:
Larry Hastings <address@hidden> writes: [...]So why not piggy-back on its success? Skip "cvs2mtn"; instead create "svn2mtn", or enhance tailor's support for svn->monotone conversion as needed. Then declare the first step in the official "cvs2mtn" conversion process is "convert to Subversion"! This seems like the best bang-for-the-buck approach, getting rock-solid migration for both CVS /and/ SVN to monotone--which I'm guessing are the top two SCMs these days.
Are you aware of my net.venge.monotone.cvsimport-branch-reconstruction branch? It's using the same algorithm cvs2svn 2.0 is going to use but targets monotone directly.
It still misses support for tags and aborts on certain conflicts, so it's not exactly ready for production use, yet. And I've been very short on (spare) time recently...
I'm not entirely convinced it'll help that much: if cvs2svn does a good job then it'll be producing a subversion repository which is also a wretched hive of inconsistency (with tags made up of files from different branches, etc.). Subversion has the advantage in that it can represent such things, whereas other systems (like monotone) just can't.
That's one of the reasons why I didn't want to go that way. The other argument being that cvs_import already had most of the framework needed for the job.
Regards Markus
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |