On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:53:47AM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Eric S. Raymond <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote: > >> Anyway I hope that incremental CVS import would be needed less > >> and less as CVS is replaced by any more modern version control system. > > > > I agree. I have never understood why people on this list are attached to > > it. > > I think I have answered this question already once in this thread, and > a few times in similar threads with Eric in the past. > > People track CVS repos that they have not control over. Smart > programmers forced to work with a corporate CVS repo. It happens also > with SVN, and witness the popularity of git-svn which can sanely > interact with an "active" svn repo. > > This is a valid use case. Hard (impossible?) to support. But there > should be no surprise as to its reasons.
And at this point the git-cvsimport manpage says: WARNING: git cvsimport uses cvsps version 2, which is considered deprecated; it does not work with cvsps version 3 and later. If you are performing a one-shot import of a CVS repository consider using cvs2git[1] or parsecvs[2]. Which I think sums up the position nicely; if you're doing a one-shot import then the standalone tools are going to be a better choice, but if you're trying to use Git for your work on top of CVS the only choice is cvsps with git-cvsimport. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
