tech-repository archive

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

Re: git copies of cvs modules available

Rhialto <> writes:

> That is great! Thanks!

Indeed, this is awesome!  I've experimented with importing pkgsrc
into bzr, but even with all the recent improvements, it's still
no good.  Quite a shame, I think.  I've just been working with
silly non-history-preserving branches.  I use git at work and
really hate it, but not so much as to prevent me from switching
over for pkgsrc work :).

> > They are not authoritative and are not meant to replace cvs,

It's a good start.  Maybe people will experiment with it and
learn how we could be working.

> indeed, since user need to be aware of a caveat: All $NetBSD$ tags
> appear to be wrong. They have the value as of the checkin of each
> version of each file, not the checkout, so they are always 1 version
> behind. (I checked this on src/Makefile which shows this in cvs
> #     $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.274 2009/09/04 17:21:33 pooka Exp $
> and this in the git version:
> #       $NetBSD: Makefile,v 1.273 2009/08/30 01:49:42 dyoung Exp $

That's how it works in CVS.  The keywords are expanded by your
client in the working copy.  Then the expanded form is committed
when you commit.  Thus, the repository is always one behind.

> (There has been a very heated discussion among GIT people why keyword
> expansion is supposed to be evil. They are not going to be convinced to
> implement it. I am very annoyed by that.)

They are evil.  Evil evil evil evil.  EVIL!  No modern system
supports them, nor are they likely, and we're all the better
for it.

Eric Gillespie <*>

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index