On Oct 23, 1:42 am, Waldemar Kornewald <wkornew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 23, 2009, James Bennett <ubernost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >> How about using BitBucket? Does it have the same limitation? I see
> >> there's already a Django mirror there:
>
> > If anyone's interested, I can see about maintaining a copy pulling
> > from any branches people are maintaining on bitbucket.
>
> > (and with hg-git, I can probably pull github branches to it, too)
>
> Just a little warning about the django mirrors on bitbucket. We tried
> to use them, too, but all branches except for trunk are broken. For
> example, there is just one single "gsoc" branch which mixes all gsoc
> svn branches. The problem is that django's svn doesn't follow the
> normal branch structure.
hgsubversion already does (and has for many months) handle your branch
layout quite well. I'd be open to hearing your feedback.
FWIW, I did a conversion to show what it looks like, and have pushed
it to BitBucket [0]. The conversion (all local, with an svnsync
mirror) won't have the same hashes as one directly from your repo,
because the repo UUID is different, but other than that is identical
to what you'd see directly from your repo. The conversion took 20
minutes with a local svnsync of your repo, and on-disk on my local
machine it was about 80 megs. I'll leave this up for a couple of weeks
or so before taking it down, since it is the majority of my BitBucket
quota. If you ask Jesper nicely, he'll probably set up an automatic
mirror with hgsubversion.
I wouldn't really recommend using hg-git to pull github branches into
hg - you're likely to end up with a confusing difference between hg-
pulled revisions and git-pulled revisions, as the systems are just
different enough that matching revisions won't have matching hashes
(exception: if you're going pure-hg or pure-git (which it didn't look
like from this thread, but maybe you are?), then hg-git is absolutely
the right option). When you're interoperating with svn, I've found
(from experience) the best thing to do is to try and use svn as the
canonical source, and not to do too much tricksy patch sharing behind
its back.
[0] http://bitbucket.org/durin42/django-hgsubversion-demo/
> We switched to hg convert'ing a mirror from github, but that way you
> lose all branch names which makes development more difficult.
Yes, there's an impedance mismatch between git branches and hg's named
branches. It's unfortunate, because other than that and their tag
handling, the systems are astonishingly similar.
>
> So, I think the best solution is to modify hg convert such that it can
> either understand your svn branch layout or give names to git
> branches. The latter approach might be better if you plan to pull
> other github branches which would be forks of the most popular github
> django mirror, so you at least get a consistent changeset history.
hg-git will tag branches with bookmarks if you have the bookmarks
extension enabled. That said, I'd still recommend using hgsubversion
for hg interop, and git-svn for git interop. You'll just be much less
frustrated that way.
Augie Fackler
(hgsubversion author, hg-git comaintainer)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
