[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: bzr repository ready?

From: Karl Fogel
Subject: Re: bzr repository ready?
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 17:49:22 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)

Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:
> Karl Fogel <address@hidden> writes:
>>    "Spot-check a branch-sync change."
> This is another merge commit that your tool appears to mishandle.  When
> checking out the cvs trees before and after the change I see no
> difference to the corresponding git trees, except that the files that
> were renamed in this merge appear under both names in the older CVS
> checkout.  The latter may be a limitation of cvs when checking out a
> date, or it could be due to an invalid direct manipulation of the cvs
> history (manually adding a branch tag instead of going through cvs
> add/rm).

Or more likely, direct manipulation of the files in the CVS repository
(i.e., renaming).

Thanks.  I probably could have done the same checks you just did, but I
have to admit that by that point I was ready to be doing something else
for a bit (these verifications take a lot of legwork :-) ).

>>    "Check that all tags are present."
> These tags are all present in the git tree.  May be a bug in the
> git->bzr conversion.

Yup.  We'll look into it.

>>    "Check that all branches are present."
> Likewise, the branches are all present in the git tree.

Okay, thanks.

> The master-UNNAMED-BRANCH contains changes belonging to revisions that
> are unreachable from any branch tag.  The name was constructed by
> parsecvs since such unreferenced commits cannot exist in git.  Actually,
> this branch combines several such anonymous branches, but parsecvs could
> not tell them apart.

I never would have thought of that.  Hunh.  Thanks.


reply via email to

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