On 7/7/10, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > So what happens right now using the existing git repository is that > > the $PostgeSQL$ tags are there, but they're unexpanded. They just say > > $PostgreSQL$ rather than $PostgreSQL: tgl blah blah$. > > > Really? All of them? Seems like that would have taken some intentional > processing somewhere.
AFAIK that's what CVS actually keeps in repo, it expands keywords when writing files out. > If we could make the conversion work like that (rather than removing the > whole line) it would negate my line-number-change argument, which might > mean that files pulled from the repository would be "close enough" to > their actual historical form that no one would mind. It's still a > judgment call though. On balance I think I'd rather adopt the simple > rule that historical file states in the git repository should match what > you would have gotten from the cvs repository. I would prefer that the diffs should match what CVS gives / what got committed. Sanity-checking by comparing CVS checkout with GIT checkout with unexpanded keywords can be scripted easily enough, and is one-time affair. But humans want to review old diffs quite more frequently... +1 keeping keywords, but unexpanded. -- marko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
