From: Christian Biesinger Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:02:11 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ignore commits for which cvsps can't identify a branch Message-ID: <43ED0D63.5090105@web.de> In-Reply-To: <7vmzgyvrih.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Junio C Hamano wrote: > Does continuing with this kind of "fixups" produce usable > history, perhaps just some changes missing but trees contained > in other commits are still faithful reproductions of what the > CVS repository would have given you? Or does it result in > unusable history? I have to admit that I can't actually tell you for sure, since I still get a failure later (I think it's because cvsps orders changesets wrongly). However, I was told that the revisions that give me this CVSPS_NO_BRANCH issue came into existence by (partially) removing tags from a file, so not listing them should be fine, I think. (This happened by copying a ,v file and removing its tags, simulating a file copy) Anyway, based on that, I expect that the history is the same as what I get from cvs, but I can't verify that. > Depending on the nature of corruption and its expected use, > sometimes silently corrupt conversion result is worse than not > having it at all. Well, without the patch this error is fatal, and the conversion is very partial. I'm not sure if that's better. (This is also not "silent" corruption. I do show a message for it. Would you rather have it displayed unconditionally?) Would it be better to have a flag --continue-on-errors?