Joseph Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com>:
> > I'm more worried about missing files. I saw a bunch of those on my
> > last test. This could be spurious - the elaborate set of branch
> > mappings you specified confuses my validation test, because there is
> > no longer a 1-1 corresponsence between Subversion and git branches.
>
> I'm hoping any such missing file problems come from bugs in the old SVN
> dump reader with complicated commits mixing copies / deletions /
> replacements with copies from other locations and that your rewrite will
> fix the semantics in such cases.
Also possible.
The old code was a hairball. The new code is a bunch of relatively simple
sequential passes - 10 so far, final version likely to have 12 or 13 - with
well-defined preconditions and exit contracts. If nothing else this is
going to make troubleshooting any remaining defects much easier.
> All the current gcc-conversion merge requests, both mine and Richard's,
> should now be set to allow rebasing.
They were, and are all merged now, except for one that Richard just landed.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
