Yep. you're right. I think i need to take serious look again the
workflow you are advocating.

On Oct 14, 4:42 pm, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen <tfn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That sounds like a problematic setup. A git svn dcommit rewrites the commit
> by adding git-svn-id's to the commit message, and therefore gets a new hash
> (SHA).
>
> Having a dedicated person that commits changes into SVN will lead to the
> others having to reset and rebase, all the time, yes. I think it's better
> that each person is responsible for committing his or her own changes back
> into SVN.
>
> I've written a whole lot of stuff about this kind of setup
> here:http://www.tfnico.com/presentations/git-and-subversion- Exactly why
> having a dedicated repository (or person) committing back to SVN is a bad
> idea is explained
> here:http://blog.tfnico.com/2011/03/dream-of-bi-directional-git-svn-mirror...

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To post to this group, send email to git-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to