Re: I have end-of-lifed cvsps
- From
John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
- Date
- Dec 18, 2013, 19:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20131218195450.GK3163@serenity.lan>
- In-Reply-To
- <CACPiFC+W-RiO-YL=Wgs7YzV=z-p97ehfA+64j5F2KbayPAQm8w@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:53:47AM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> wrote: > >> Anyway I hope that incremental CVS import would be needed less > >> and less as CVS is replaced by any more modern version control system. > > > > I agree. I have never understood why people on this list are attached to it. > > I think I have answered this question already once in this thread, and > a few times in similar threads with Eric in the past. > > People track CVS repos that they have not control over. Smart > programmers forced to work with a corporate CVS repo. It happens also > with SVN, and witness the popularity of git-svn which can sanely > interact with an "active" svn repo. > > This is a valid use case. Hard (impossible?) to support. But there > should be no surprise as to its reasons.
And at this point the git-cvsimport manpage says:
WARNING: git cvsimport uses cvsps version 2, which is considered deprecated; it does not work with cvsps version 3 and later. If you are performing a one-shot import of a CVS repository consider using cvs2git[1] or parsecvs[2].
Which I think sums up the position nicely; if you're doing a one-shot import then the standalone tools are going to be a better choice, but if you're trying to use Git for your work on top of CVS the only choice is cvsps with git-cvsimport.