On Feb 24, 2004, at 4:58 PM, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 15:39, Jack Repenning wrote:
>>> Should CVS users see one behavior on the data they
>>> had in their CVS repositories, and another behavior on data they have
>>> created since?
>
>> Well, should CVS users see one behavior on the data they committed
>> before the conversion, and a different behavior on the same data after
>> conversion?
>
> Sure, if Subversion behaves differently. For instance, if I run "cvs
> log" on a file in my working copy, I see commits which are more recent
> than my working directory, but "svn log" only shows me commits which
> are
> older than my working copy.
Your idea here seems to be "import it so (as much as possible) it looks
like it had always been maintained in SVN."
My idea here is "import it so (as much as possible) it looks like it
always did, which, yes, includes a disreputable period within that
blasphemous CVS."
I think I said that already. I can't see, in your response, that the
point was received. Maybe I'm clearer this time?
-==-
Jack Repenning
CollabNet, Inc.
8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 600
Brisbane, California 94005
o: 650.228.2562
c: 408.835.8090
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Feb 25 19:19:58 2004