openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: An svn question
Date Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:37:49 GMT
The separate Hg repositories could go into separate sub-project branches if that is more convenient
for bringing them over.  My sense is that once they are in Subversion, it is relatively easy
to massage them or consolidate into a composite project tree (by SVN copying) that is where
any further adaptation and use occurs - I am assuming there are no collisions between Hg subprojects.

I think the bigger issue is preserving the Hg history and the different revisions.
Is there any agreement on how deeply we need history, is the full history essential for provenance

 - Dennis

PS: I wonder, was there history lost as part of the past move to Hg?  I had the sense it was
preserved, but am now unsure.

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Stein [] 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 12:18
Subject: Re: An svn question

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


View raw message