Why not merge all other branches into master at this point and then re
create them once the migration to git is complete and then make the svn
repo read only and let people know that we now use git
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Michael T. Pope <mp...@computer.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:43:00 PM Michael T. Pope wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:47:41 AM Michael T. Pope wrote:
> > > We have a git repo
> >
> > Unfortunately, its a crappy one which did not import the branch and tag
> > structure of the svn repo correctly. Please ignore it until I can get
> this
> > right.
>
> OK, this time we have a useful git repo up. I have even successfully
> committed to it. However there are some issues remaining.
>
> I used svn2git to do the conversion. It only took two tries to get it
> to work:-S. svn2git has a rebase option that will allow me to merge
> changes anyone makes to the sourceforge svn repo into the local git
> repo I have used for the conversion, so maintaining sync should be
> reasonably straightforward.
>
> What is not straightforward is the conversion itself. Our svn repo is
> really six virtual repos wrapped into one. The top level has six
> parts (audio, conceptual, freecol, graphics, movie, website), each
> with the standard {branches,tags,trunk} structure below it. The only
> one I know anything about is freecol, which is the game itself. I
> expect Michael knows what is happening in graphics, as he is listed as
> committing there 5 days ago. The others are inactive.
>
> I tried doing a direct conversion of the top level, but this does not
> pick up the branches structure for all the parts, only the one you
> specify. So what we have is just the freecol part of the svn repo.
> This has the correct current branch structure:
>
> > git branch
> 0.11.x
> 0.7.x
> 0.8.x
> 0.9.0-alpha2
> 0.9.x
> * master
> unlabeled-1.2.1
> vendor
>
> IIRC 0.11.x was created for Michael's specification work, and is long
> out of date. It is a bit misleading. Should we rename it, or just
> drop it? I have no idea what unlabeled-1.2.1 or vendor are. Not a
> big deal, in git branches are cheap.
>
> (BTW tags are not auto-converted because of an ambiguity problem
> (described in the svn2git doco). They are not too hard to recover if
> people want them. I already know where all the 0.10.x release points
> are, and gitk --all shows the full story. It is very convenient to be
> able to look at a bug report, git checkout <version-bug-is-from>,
> reproduce bug, git checkout master, fail to reproduce bug, comment
> that it is fixed in trunk, and move on:-)
>
> Anyway, we should decide what to do with the other five top-level parts
> of the svn repo.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike Pope
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Master HTML5, CSS3, ASP.NET, MVC, AJAX, Knockout.js, Web API and
> much more. Get web development skills now with LearnDevNow -
> 350+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts.
> SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122812
> _______________________________________________
> Freecol-developers mailing list
> Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
>
>
--
Jonathan Aquilina
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master HTML5, CSS3, ASP.NET, MVC, AJAX, Knockout.js, Web API and
much more. Get web development skills now with LearnDevNow -
350+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts.
SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122812
_______________________________________________
Freecol-developers mailing list
Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
