On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 17:51 +0200, Lutz Jaenicke wrote: > 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.
That's interesting. What tool were you testing? I've had issues with both cvs2git and git-cvsimport. My normal reaction in dealing with _any_ project which uses a legacy version control system (cvs,svn,hg,bzr,etc) is to mirror it into git so that I can deal with it sensibly. OpenSSL has so far resisted my efforts, which is one of the reason I find it a PITA to deal with. -- dwmw2 ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [email protected] Automated List Manager [email protected]
