couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Newson <>
Subject Re: dev Digest of: thread.17379
Date Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:46:15 GMT
It seems the tools at use the new svn info to notice
merges and such, so those tools are superior to git-svn (assuming it's
not just a newer version of git-svn itself).


On 8 August 2011 19:22, Paul Davis <> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Dustin Sallings <> wrote:
>> On July 31, 2011 9:29:40 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
>>> 4. Before making the complete switch I'll end up making a handful of
>>> Git clones to check that our history is preserved. I plan on writing a
>>> script to make Graphviz images of the branch history and so on, but
>>> having people volunteer to look back at the history to spot errors
>>> would be helpful as well.
>>        I believe I can be of help if you need any.
>>        I've done a lot of very complicated git conversions (including things
like taking memcached git dev and transplanting it above an older subversion conversion that
was discovered later and another that involved merging 24 different git repos that were moving
concurrently at the root level into a single that had 24 subdirectories and linear history)
and really got to know git well along the way.
>>        If there's any hard work to do here, I'm sure I've enjoyed doing it before.
>>        [btw, if anyone wants to see what a 24-way octopus merge looks like:
>> --
>> dustin sallings
> Nice! Any hints you have about validating SVN->Git conversions or
> tooling would be greatly appreciated. I don't really have much other
> than the obvious Graphviz plotting tool. Beyond that I don't have
> anything other than getting each TLP to verify their own history.
> I'm also not sure if it makes a difference, but the ASF SVN repo is
> one huge monolithic thing, so it's a lot of project histories
> intertwined which I'm looking forward to finding awesome conversion
> bugs with.

View raw message