tech-repository archive

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

Re: Proposed conversion strategy

Reinoud Zandijk <> writes:

> See f.e.
>> If so I'd like to understand what it is you are calling a "sub-branch",
>> as I'm not sure what that is.
> There are various links there to various points in other repositories; those
> are the types i talked about. These points could be considered vendor branch
> imports but they are set to specific commit points to ensure that despite
> further enhancements on each of the brances this checkout contains a working
> set.

Assuming git, we could certainly decide not to use submodules.  The fact
that submodules have issues is not a reason not to use git, just to
avoid submodules.

It's relatively straighforward to do do vendor imports to a branch
disconnected from master and then to do a subtree merge to place it at
the right point.  For example, in a private repo I have 'vendor/netbsd'
with a snapshot of netbsd, and then have subtree merged it to
master:netbsd, so that it shows up under the netbsd directory in the
top-level checkout.   Of course, this would be something like
vendor/postfix and then mapped into

It's unclear to me how the conversion tools deal with these vendor
imports to points below the root.  It seems that the best thing would be
to map them to vendor/foo branches with subtree merges.

Attachment: pgppWnh3nMggN.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index