[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: cscvs--experimental--1.1 nearing doneness; call

From: Tupshin Harper
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: cscvs--experimental--1.1 nearing doneness; call for testers
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:15:24 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6a) Gecko/20030924

Tom Lord wrote:

   > From: Charles Duffy <address@hidden>

   > Incidentally: bkcvs makes some guarantees [every revision in a given
   > changeset at the same timestamp, no two changesets at the same
   > timestamp] that make it ideal for doing a perfectly accurate cscvs-style
> reconstruction very easily...

I don't follow BK very closely.   I sample lkml from time to time is
about it.

One thing I saw go by sounded as if LM was saying their would be
tar-bundled (traditional) patch-sets for each BK revision of every
bkbits project.   Is that right?   If so, wouldn't _that_ be a very
easy source to use for cross-revctl-system mirroring?

Yes, that is almost certainly the "correct" way of doing any BK<-->Arch. The bkcvs route is (IMO) an undesirable hack as opposed to working with the BK changesets directly.

Rik van Riel makes available (via ftp, http and rsync) the broken out changesets for the 2.4 and 2.5 trees.

Anyone with a bitkeeper tree can easily export it in this format. Currently, the 2.5 patches are somewhere north of 1.7G and 100,000 patches.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]