On 06/10/2019 17.59, Nick Kew wrote:
On 6 Oct 2019, at 04:06, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote:
On 05/10/2019 19.30, Nick Kew wrote:
If it moves to github, how and at what level is history preserved? Github can do
alarming things with history even for a project that's always been there!
We would have the exact same level of history as before (one might even say
we'll get more history, as you can specify committer and author separately in
git). If you look at https://github.com/apache/httpd which is our current git
mirror, it should have the exact same commits going back to 1996 as the
subversion repository. There is a bit of a lag on the mirror right now, but
that is a separate issue that will be fixed on October 12th.
OK, I've just dug up an example in an Apache/Github project. A simple renaming
of a source file, that with "svn mv" would have preserved history, seems to have
essentially wiped its past. 'History' is highly misleading, 'Blame' is 100%
wrong!
It would be 100% wrong in svn as well if the same operation had been
performed there, as it wasn't a move - the number of lines don't match
up. There is a `git mv` just like `svn mv` that preserves history, AIUI.
A file where `svn mv` was actually used [1] shows that the history is
preserved through the mv operation and blame works as intended, even in git.
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/blob/master/plugins/experimental/stream_editor/stream_editor.cc
And that's within git: no actual change-of-repos involved.
Regarding httpd, we have the git mirror, so access is available through whatever
a contributor prefers. How is that not best-of-both-worlds?
As Eric alluded to, it's much less about svn versus git than it is about
tapping into the community on GitHub. If there was an svnhub, I'd be all
for that as an easier way to do this, but alas no.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/httpd/blame/dc8ed8a7df9edbe9340a1bc5f01501dbd60e8366/server/mpm/beos/config5.m4
