incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jens-Heiner Rechtien <>
Subject Re: An svn question
Date Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:21:47 GMT
On 06/23/2011 09:17 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 14:02, Pedro F. Giffuni<>  wrote:
>> Disclaimer: I am no SVN expert but I play a lot with
>> FreeBSD's SVN repository.
>> --- On Thu, 6/23/11, Mathias Bauer<>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I'm no svn expert, but I hope to find some here.
>>> We still have a lot of work in so called child workspaces
>>> (in Mercurial they are just an own repository that
>>> originates from the "main" repository).
>> In subversion those are "branches", so you create a branch
>> everytime there is a release or if you want to create a
>> your own custom project with experimental changes that will
>> be merged later on.
> Yup. Here is how the Subversion project itself uses branches:
> Regarding the existing CWSs, those repositories "should be" imported
> as branches here at the ASF. I'm not entirely sure how to gather up a
> bunch of Hg repositories and blend them into a single repository, but
> that would be best. We can then convert that single Hg repository to
> Subversion and load the sucker onto

Merging them in hg is easy, just pull/merge. But ... we are talking 
about a hundred or so CWSs here. In all kinds of readiness states.

If we merge them now, we won't have a working OOo for a long time. Now, 
we could skip the merge part and leave the heads "dangling". Hg heads 
are kinda anonymous branches in Mercurial. Don't know if a repository 
with multiple heads can be converted to SVN. Probably quite tricky (the 
tool would need to generate sensible names for the different heads).

I would suggest that we only merge the "safe" CWSs in hg now and for the 
rest take the patch approach Mathias suggested.

Never thought that we would ever have to go back to Subversion :-)


Jens-Heiner Rechtien

View raw message