Re: Multiple branches and git-svn

> Yes, that's quite true. It took me quite a while to figure that out  
> when I
> first started using git-svn, and its non-sensicalness nearly put me  
> off using
> git entirely. My workflow at this point is to use git-cherry-pick - 
> e to pull in
> any changes from other branches, then delete the git-svn-id line.
>
> Essentially, merging using git-svn is almost entirely broken, since an
> inconsistent tool is worthless - you spend more time figuring out  
> if it's going
> to break, and working around the breakage, than you save using it.

>
> Now, I'm not sure this is 100% the fault of git-svn. Perhaps  
> keeping its
> metadata about which SVN branch it's connected to isn't the best  
> thing, but
> git-merge is doing exactly what you ask for. Perhaps we need a  
> merge command in
> git-svn that does the right thing? Although what that right thing  
> would be, I'm
> not quite sure.  Either way, there needs to be a BIG GIGANTIC  
> WARNING in the
> git-svn manual that if you actually use git for what it claims to  
> be great at
> (i.e., merging) you may be in for a world of pain, with your  
> coworkers and boss
> coming at you with pitchforks and torches. Especially because there  
> are
> so many git users who need to interoperate with SVN.
>