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