From: Josef Sipek <jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:39:16 GMT
Subject: Re: StGIT (or guilt) + git-svn?
Message-ID: <20070724193915.GA6291@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
In-Reply-To: <46A5EE4B.7020905@midwinter.com>

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:19:23PM +0800, Steven Grimm wrote:
> Steven Walter wrote:
> >That said, I'm not sure that stgit will help you with "local versioning"
> >of files (I'm not even sure what you mean).  Perhaps you can elaborate
> >on this point.
> >  
> 
> He wants to create some files in his git-svn clone and use git to manage 
> them -- checkpointing his work in progress, backing out changes, etc., 
> without publishing those files to the svn repository. The files in 
> question are not already in svn. But he does want to work on other files 
> that *are* in the svn repository, and wants those changes to be 
> committed back.
> 
> So my assumption was that he would do something like maintain his 
> local-only changes as StGIT patches that never get committed to git. His 
> other changes would get committed from StGIT to git, and from there he'd 
> do his normal git-svn dcommit. Or maybe git-svn dcommit followed by stg 
> rebase since git-svn dcommit creates new revision IDs.
> 
> In any event, now that I know it's working successfully for at least one 
> person, I'll point him to stg and he can play with it a bit. Didn't want 
> to lead him into a dead end. Thanks!

If I understand your scenario correctly, guilt will work just as well.

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

-- 
All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
		- Ernest Rutherford