Re: Moving to git

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda(at)truviso(dot)com> wrote:
>> PS: Does it really matter if the history is a bit altered by the
>> conversion process? As long as HEAD and the tags are the same?
>
> I think we can tolerate some minor discrepancies, but we do want
>
> 1. Diff-free HEAD, tags, and tips of branches
> 2. A sensible-looking development history that represents more or less
> what happened in CVS
>
> If we only pay attention to (1), we lose too much information, since,
> e.g., development history can be critical in determining when a bug
> was introduced and what releases it affects.
>
>> The history could be kept in a read-only cvs-repository :-)
>
> Or we could keep a git mirror and you submit patches that are applied
> to the CVS repo, which you then pull into your repo through
> git-cvsimport once they're committed. There are all sorts of technical
> tricks we can play, but I think the goal is to minimize that, and
> essentially have a git repo representing the entire development
> history as if pgjdbc had been using git from day one.
>
> ---
> Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso
>
> 1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
> Foster City, CA 94404
> (650) 242-3500 Main
> www.truviso.com
>

Are we at a state where this is workable ?

Dave