Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 02 Feb 2008 12:11:56 -0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To:        OutBackDingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, Adrian Penisoara <ady@freebsd.ady.ro>
Subject:   Re: [OT] Q: what would you choose for a VCS today
Message-ID:  <47A4CE8C.3010109@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <1201967351.13273.6.camel@myhost>
References:  <78cb3d3f0801302245v2183c613t6ecdd9acebbe9ef7@mail.gmail.com>	<20080131110237.06860561@mbook.mired.org>	<78cb3d3f0802011434p5bed2b1ex39320962f0bc8bf5@mail.gmail.com> <1201967351.13273.6.camel@myhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
OutBackDingo wrote:
> I dont think I follow why people think its that hard to convert the
> FreeBSD src tree to some other RCS with history, branches and tags
> 
> I have a FULL CVS conversion to a mercurial tree converted from a
> February 1, 2008 CVS snapshot. I also have a Full CVS converted to
> Subversion. And they have been to the best of my determinations thru
> ongoing testing fully converted. Id be more then happy to have others
> double check the integrity of both trees and see if something got
> missed. I seem to think this is doable. Seeing as Ive done it. And
> honestly Mercurial just rocks. Id prefer to host it externally if
> someone had some space, over all both trees consume space but not that
> incredibly awful. Any takers for testing?


ok, so how do you pull revision 1.x.1.1 of ng_base.c from mercurial?
(no, really I would like to know).

One problem is tha tyour revision x of a file bears no relationship to 
my version x or the file. which makes comments like
"that bug was fixed in revision x  of that file. Make sure you
have at least that revision" really hard to do.

And you need to make a complete clone of the repo to play with a 
different branch of one file. You can't check out subtrees.



> 
> 
> On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 00:34 +0200, Adrian Penisoara wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Jan 31, 2008 6:02 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:45:55 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <ady@freebsd.ady.ro>
>>> wrote:
>>>>   Side-topic, if you bear with me: if you were to choose again what to
>>> use
>>>> as source revision control system (VCS) from today's offerings, what
>>> would
>>>> you choose to maintain FreeBSD's sources or a side-off project tracking
>>>> FreeBSD as base that would allow better teams cooperation and easy code
>>>> merging between projects/branches ?
>>> Pretty much any post-CVS VCS will do that. But if you want a good
>>> merge facility, Perforce's are - well, after getting used to them,
>>> everything else feels like throwing your code against the wall and
>>> hoping the right parts stick. I talked to one of the git developers
>>> about a year ago, and they were thinking about adding a guided merge
>>> inspired by what Perforce does.
>>>
>>>
>> I do trust you on Perforce being a strong contender for the job, but,
>> unfortunately, looking at their licensing terms for OSS projects I do get
>> some second thoughts. Perhaps that's why FreeBSD did not migrate mainstream
>> sources over to P4 yet ;)...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Adrian Penisoara
>> ROFUG / EnterpriseBSD
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47A4CE8C.3010109>