Am 25.11.2011 21:58, schrieb Giovanni Bajo:
> I'm -1 on destroying the history. There have been far larger projects 
> migrated/imported into git in non-destructive way (eg: gcc, whose history is 
> several order of magnitude worse than PyInstaller's), so I am confident that 
> it can be done. It might take some work to get to it, but on the other hand 
> there is no a real need of switching SCM either, so it's a balance on how 
> much you feel like investing. But surely I don't like the idea of destroying 
> the history just because it make us switch faster.

I would like to keep al history, but I wonder if it is worth the efoert
for doing it "right".

Keeping the history as it is will least to a lot of garbage, since there
are a lot of "garbage" commits. Some examples:
- taging as .../trunk (r98)
- branching from a tag (r1378)
- changes on a "tag" (r1377)

While this sounds do be forgettable, but unfortunatly this leads to
compelty mixed up branches and tagsin mercurital (or git). I can push
the result of such a change to bitbucket, so you can get an impression
of the result at oyur own.

But anyway: If you are not supporting switchinf to a DVCS, we simply can
not switch, because we would need some changes to be done at
delever.com. (Except if we would find a we to automatical merge into SVN.)

-- 
Schönen Gruß - Regards
Hartmut Goebel
Dipl.-Informatiker (univ.), CISSP, CSSLP

Goebel Consult 
Spezialist für IT-Sicherheit in komplexen Umgebungen
http://www.goebel-consult.de

Monatliche Kolumne: http://www.cissp-gefluester.de/
Goebel Consult ist Mitglied bei http://www.7-it.de


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to