Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [off-list ref] writes:
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 21:25, Enrico Weigelt [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
I'm curious on how deterministic the imports (git-cvsimport and
git-svn) are. Suppose I close the same cvs repo twice (assuming
no write access in between), are the resulting object SHA-1's
the same ?
No, because the committer dates will be different.
The committer info in every commit will be the same as the author info,
so the repository conversion is completely deterministic.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
* Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] wrote:
The committer info in every commit will be the same as the author info,
so the repository conversion is completely deterministic.
Thanks, that helps a lot.
My point is that I'm running a buch of automatic mirrors and like
to get them clustered. In theory, it should be enough - for cvs -
running git-cvsimport regularily on all nodes, right ?
cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@metux.de
mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] wrote:
The committer info in every commit will be the same as the author info,
so the repository conversion is completely deterministic.
For cvsimport, it is not deterministic. Given cvs'
ambiguous/buggy/inconsistent internal semantics around some
operations, cvsps makes educated guesses about what happened.
Later commits can affect those educated guesses.
IIRC, this affects the exact tree at the birth of a branch, and files
added on a branch (instead of on HEAD).
If you use cvsimport in 'incremental' runs you won't have this
problem. Whatever it decided to do, sticks.
I haven't worked in detail with Keith Packard's parsecvs but I assume
it has similar issues.
hth,
m
--
martin.langhoff@gmail.com
martin@laptop.org -- School Server Architect
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff