Re: git: uh-oh

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 21:16, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> It appears that the git conversion of the CVS repository is seriously
>> screwed up.  For example, if you look at this:
>
> Um ... Magnus has not given any report that he's finished running
> the conversion.  What exactly are you looking at?

That's the previous conversion. The one that we used to verify that
things looked ok. Seems nobody caught this :S

The new migration looks similarly weird.

Does anybody with some more git-fu have any clue how this can be?

The tip of every branch, and every single tag, all have the correct
data in them, but some revisions in between seem majorly confused.

>> It's too bad that nobody noticed this sooner, but I'm glad I noticed
>> today rather than tomorrow.
>
> We're not going to start using the git repository until everyone is
> satisfied it's OK, both as to current contents and history.

Yeah..

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/