On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 08:30:43AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote: > > > > Am 28.04.2020 um 08:29 schrieb Andreas Gustafsson <[email protected]>: > > > > [email protected] wrote: > >> Yes, I believe joerg and spz are changing the conversion from > >> cvs->??->git to hg->git, to match what will be done once we stop using > >> CVS. > > > > Has there been a formal decision choosing hg over git? > > I am also interested in this. > >
This feels like a protest. Since it's addressing me, I'd like to point out I'm just letting people know why the conversion is down, and don't get any more of a say over things than others. As a reminder, hg/git offer far better interoperability (than CVS). Much of my own NetBSD work is done on Git, and even if I don't stop doing this, I would be happier if the backend was Mercurial. The CVS->??->git conversion loses information on the parents of branch merges, so we carry a growing graft file, and it has to be adjusted whenever there's a forced push. Having Mercurial at the back would eliminate ~all forced pushes and have real merge commits. Exporting the commits would require a lot less threats and custom scripts on current-users, because pushing is distinct from committing.
