On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 04:34:28PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:22:37PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > > That would be unfortunate. I wonder if it can be done, though: if you > > can create a darcs repository representing the CVS repo at the branch > > point, by unpulling all the relevant patches, then get tailor to pull > > over everything on the branch, you'd have a proper branch repository. > > Probably the difficult bit is creating the branch-point repo. > > Another difficulty (show-stopper?) is the following: > If on the (long-lived) branch you periodically sync from HEAD, these > changes, when converted by tailor) are not equivalent to the respective > changes on HEAD. > That's at least how I understand it; be sure to correct me if I'm wrong.
That is correct, I think. tailor will commit a diff, not merge in the patch from a different repo. I guess what it boils down to is that branches in the darcsified version of a CVS repo will be no better than the CVS branching system for awhile. Until all the branches can be expressed as a fork of darcs at a certain point plus some patches, anyway. Merging would be darcs diff -u and patch -p1 until then. Hopefully, at some point, all patches from a given branch would be merged into mainline, and then the branch can be re-created in darcs. (Either that, or the branch would just die.) OR... I could darcsify HEAD like usual, then make a branch in darcs and commit one big diff that represents the delta from CVS HEAD as of today to CVS (whatever branch) as of today. Loss of history in darcs, but would make merging a lot easier perhaps. (And you'd not see that history in CVS once you merge it back onto HEAD anyway) Maybe someone else has some better ideas? -- John _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
