On Jan 23, 2013, at 2:31 AM, Geert Janssens <janssens-ge...@telenet.be> wrote:

> On 22-01-13 14:30, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Geert Janssens <janssens-ge...@telenet.be> writes:
>> 
>>> Another option would be to keep John's Jeeves set up to handle all
>>> git-svn interaction until we can drop our svn set up completely.
>>> 
>>> The only change needed on John's server would be that it should push
>>> all updates to the gitolite repositories instead of the github
>>> ones. The gitolite manages repos then push to github.
>>> 
>>> The last part is the only part we want to keep long term: master
>>> repositories in gitolite on code.gnucash.org, which sync to github for
>>> a wider audience.
>>> 
>>> In the worst case, we have to keep the git-svn stuff around until we
>>> abandon the 2.4 development. But with some tweaking, it may even be
>>> dropped sooner.
>>> 
>>> So the question is: is it worth the effort to try and replicate the
>>> git-svn bridge on code.gnucash.org ?
>> Maybe..  Here's the bigger issue, if I found issues/bugs in John's
>> svn->git conversion, what do we do?  (and yes, I found a problem in the
>> conversion)
>> 
>> Let me back up.  I worked with john on IRC yesterday and tracked down
>> one issue:  I was using the wrong URL.  Apparently I need to use the
>> same URL he does, which means I cannot use the file:/// url, but instead
>> I had to use the svn+ssh:// url.  Moreover, I had to use
>> svn.gnucash.org, not code.gnucash.org, so there were two issues right
>> there.  But that wasn't sufficient.
> I realised this morning that the choice of (svn) URL is no longer important. 
> The main concern to keep the original URL was to preserve the commit hashes.
> But due to the updates to the authors file, the svn import into git will 
> result in new hashes starting with the first commit which has a corrected 
> author, so preserving hashes is no longer an option.
> 
> So if you think it would be more efficient, we can do the import from another 
> url, like your original file:/// or using code.gnucash.org (depending on 
> which string you would like to see appear in the commit messages).
> 
> I saw the import was completed by now, so I'm not sure if it will gain us 
> much still by starting over once again.
> 
> The only reason I could really think of is that once we really drop svn, the 
> usr svn.gnucash.org has little meaning left, while code.gnucash.org is more 
> generic and will remain. So at some point in time, the imported commits will 
> display a non-existent url. On the other hand, even with code.gnucash.org in 
> the url, the svn paths will eventually 404, so there always will be some 
> inconsistency left.
> 
> That is just a small inconsistency though, perhaps not worth redoing the 
> migration for.

Geert,

Not so fast. When you git-svn-dcommit, you'll use the svn+ssh URL, and your 
local commit will be hashed with the resulting svn id. The mirror git, 
regardless of where it's running, needs to create a commit with the same hash 
so that when it makes the loop back to your machine, git can recognize it as 
the same commit and fast-forward your repo. 

Regards,
John Ralls
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

Reply via email to