David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 21:32 +0200, Ger Hobbelt wrote:
>
>> Those [i_a] bits are my markers in our local code base so I know which edits
>> are mine when doing a (manual) merge with 'vanilla' CVS HEAD. Yes, I know
>> there are smarter systems around, but I've been 'tracking' OpenSSL for
>> almost a decade and tools available to me haven't always been smart enough
>> to ensure I didn't lose local edits across upgrades. And drilling down the
>> RCS database for every edit isn't fun nor fast like that. So marking has
>> become a habit by now. Often accompanied with a short text about the 'why'
>> or related info. Sorry, wasn't meant to be bothersome to you.
>>
>
> None of the existing CVS->git import tools handle the OpenSSL repository
> correctly -- they all do strange things on branches. But for HEAD, they
> should work OK.
>
So far we have not seen technical problems when last tested.
> I'd be very happy to work on fixing that, if there's a real prospect of
> OpenSSL actually changing over to using such a git repository once it
> exists. I think that would make life a _lot_ easier for anyone working
> on OpenSSL.
>
Internal discussion about which version control system to use in the
future have not yet been completed.
Best regards,
Lutz
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
