[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: cvs2svn

From: Brian Behlendorf <brian_at_collab.net>
Date: 2001-04-17 01:40:28 CEST

On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Bob Miller wrote:
> Sort by time as primary key. You want to build the SVN repository in
> chronological order, anyway.

I haven't seen this brought up yet: what about repositories where people
performed a "rename" by mv'ing the ,v files in the repos instead of cvs
add/delete? Is it safe to assume that it won't corrupt the cvs2svn
process, but does mean (as expected) that checkouts before that corruption
date will be inconsistant in the same way they would have been under CVS?
Or are we talking about broken histories that make creating an SVN tree
impossible?

I hope it's the former (i.e., not worse than the CVS tree already is), but
if it's the latter we may want to consider building the tree in *reverse*
order, if that makes sense. I'd prefer to have history going back to the
last corruption instead of none at all (a fresh import).

        Brian
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:28 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.