On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:35:48AM -0600, Ian Monroe wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen <o...@kde.org> wrote: > > anyway, note that the historic (cvs) branches in our svn repo are still > > screwed up. > > What's messed up? We've gone this long without trouble. :) > lots of files are simply missing on the branches. dirk an coolo fixed it up manually for the then active branches, but the historical branches are of no value. i guess there were only a handful of cases where somebody was bothered by that problem - svn branches are so hard to follow, that nobody looks into them anyway.
> > btw, does any svn => git tool understand module moves within a bigger > > repository or would the history before the last move be lost anyway? > > Amarok was moved (extragear was reorganized at the CVS->SVN > transition) and even git-svn doesn't have any trouble following the > change. > excellent. level 2 would be auto-generating meta-modules which follow these moves over time (so one could actually check out and compile a historic version of an application which is less isolated than amarok), but that's just for the extra-pedants. :)= _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list Kde-scm-interest@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
