On 09/18/2017 02:35 PM, Jeff Muizelaar wrote:
FWIW, https://github.com/jrmuizel/gecko-cinnabar doesn't have the CVS
history so is no better than https://github.com/mozilla/gecko.
Right. Jeff corrected my confusion on IRC. His repo has both lines of
history, and the cinnabar conversion is on the cinnabar branch without
the CVS history.
Having
a canonical repo that includes the CVS history will make the SHA's
incompatible with doing a direct conversion of hg which is a
disadvantage. I'm not sure what's more valuable.
I think there is a way to have our cake and eat it too, which is
enabling git-cinnabar to understand a custom mapping of SHA1 so that we
can rewrite the history and have cinnabar be able to deal with that when
it maps hg/git revisions to each other.
It is difficult for me to compare these two things and say which is more
valuable, but it seems like a very bad choice to have to choose one of
these two alternatives. The CVS history is extremely valuable to people
dealing with code that still has a lot of its root back in the old
days. Losing it seems like a step backwards to me.
-Jeff
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 09/18/2017 01:16 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Andrew McCreight <amccrei...@mozilla.com>
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Kartikaya Gupta <kgu...@mozilla.com>
wrote:
I've tried using cinnabar a couple of times now and the last time I
tried, this was the dealbreaker for me. My worfklow often involves
moving a branch from one machine to another and the extra hassle that
results from mismatched SHAs makes it much more complicated than it
needs to be. gecko-dev doesn't have this problem as it has a canonical
upstream that works much more like a regular git user expects.
For what it is worth, I regularly pull from one machine to another with
git-cinnabar, and it works just fine without any problems from mismatched
SHAs. For me, the switch from a clone of gecko-dev to git-cinnabar has
been
totally transparent.
+1. The non-stable SHA problem was solved a long time ago. Same goes for
any big performance issues. In my experience, cinnabar is pretty darn
transparent.
https://github.com/mozilla/gecko is effectively the canonical repo people
are talking about. I sometimes pull that, but git-cinnabar is fast enough
that it works fine to just clone the hg repo directly. If it weren't for
the occasional annoyance of mapping commits between local revs and hg.m.o
links, I would basically forget that the core infrastructure is running
hg.
That repo doesn't have the CVS history. :-( I realize that is fixable with
a local graft and a clone of gecko-dev, but a lot of blood and sweat went
into making our current canonical git repo include the full CVS history (I
maintained it myself for ~3 years and a lot of people spent quite a bit of
time and energy to stand up the current infrastructure that maintains
gecko-dev.) Would it be possible to base the canonical git-cinnabar repo on
https://github.com/jrmuizel/gecko-cinnhabar which does have the full CVS
history?
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
