Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add more tests of cvsimport

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 20, 2009, 15:00 UTC
Message-ID: <20090220150022.GB3515@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <499E8432.9010806@alum.mit.edu>

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:21:38AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> > I do wonder, though, whether it would be simpler to make a "cvs import
> > test suite" that could pluggably test cvs2svn, git-cvsimport, or other
> > converters. Then you could test each on the exact same set of test
> > repos. And abstracting "OK, now make a repository from this cvsroot"
> > wouldn't be that hard for each command (I wouldn't think, but obviously
> > I haven't tried it :) ).
> [...]
> But other tests would be harder to write in a neutral fashion.  For
> example, the cvs2svn test suite has tests of log messages, character-set
> conversions of metadata, correct commit ordering, branching topology, etc.

OK. I haven't looked at it and you have, so I will accept your judgement.

Show 6 quoted lines

> > The code in t9600 (which gets moved to lib-cvs in your patch 1) sets
> > HOME explicitly. So is this really a problem?
> 
> That's a good question.  I just checked, and empirically cvs uses .cvsrc
> from my true home directory even if HOME is set differently.  So I think
> that the -f option is indeed necessary.

Yuck. But if that's the way it works, then I think your patch is the only way.

> > Cool. Are you volunteering to fix git-cvsimport, too? :)
> Not unless you call cvs2git the fixed version :-)

Heh.

> design limits).  But I hope to raise awareness that cvsps-based tools
> are not the best choice for "one-shot" conversions, and maybe work
> against people's tendency to use the "default" tool unless it obviously
> blows up.

Agreed. I have seen that advice given on the list several times, and it seems to be working for people. So it really is about the right tool for the job, IMHO.

-Peff