RE: git-svn set-tree

From: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>
Date: Jul 10, 2007, 22:45 UTC
Message-ID: <000901c7c344$12b431a0$02ac10ac@Jocke>
In-Reply-To: <20070709054541.GA2301@mayonaise>

Show 26 quoted lines

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Wong [mailto:normalperson@yhbt.net] 
> Sent: den 9 juli 2007 07:46
> To: Tjernlund
> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: git-svn set-tree
> 
> Tjernlund <tjernlund@tjernlund.se> wrote:
> > I have noticed that if I do a git-svn set-tree, remotes/git-svn
> > retains the parent from the branch where set-tree was performed.
> > 
> > If a coworker wants recreate my tree by using git-svn init 
> && git-svn
> > fetch he looses the parent I have in my tree.
> > 
> > I wonder if not git-svn set-tree can record the parent 
> information in
> > the svn repos log, so that git-svn init/fetch can recreate 
> the parent
> > relationship?
> 
> We could at yet another non-standardized property into SVN to handle
> merges.  Currently there are at least two properties used in 
> the SVN/SVK
> world to represent merges (Sam Vilain can give you the fun details of
> each one!).

I have read his page, quite informative.

Show 11 quoted lines

> 
> I'm afraid adding a third incompatible yet similair property 
> for git-svn
> would just confuse people. 
> 
> I've become very much against crazy stuff like set-tree which ends up
> creating a M:N history mapping between git and svn.  1:1 is 
> the simplest
> and easiest.  I'm more than willing to sacrifice multi-parent 
> histories
> in git for easier compatibility with other systems.

set-tree is needed for starting a SVN tree from a git tree, I don't know of any other way to do that. I got both linux and u-boot git trees in which I do custom mods. I then use git-svn to maintain a svn tree which I start with set-tree to commit the initial tree, then I dcommit my local mods.

Maybe maybe an option to git-svn init/clone where you can specify the git parent for a certain svn revision?

Show 7 quoted lines

> 
> Heck, linear history is just easier to deal with and probably 
> preferable
> in most/many cases.  I'm sure that the rising popularity of 
> git-rebase,
> quilt, stgit, guilt, mq and other like tools is a testament to that.
>

git rebase is a bit annoying as you loose the old tree if you don't take precations. Also, I am not sure what will be committed to SVN if I rebase my local mods on top of linus latest.

 Jocke

> -- 
> Eric Wong
>