Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 18:13, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Kevin Grittner
<kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
I despaired of this repo being anything like reliable months ago.
AFAIK it is using a known to be broken version of fromcvs.
Could we have it pull (using git) from the repo you have working
correctly? (Or would that be too Rube Goldbergesque?)
It would result in a massive merge commit and the duplication of the
entire history. The correct solution is probably to (a) install
Andrew's fixed version of the import tool on the server and (b) rewind
the history on the server so it reimports all the subsequent commits.
Sometimes doing only (b) is sufficient to correct the problem, since
the tool seems rather sensitive to ephemeral states of the
respository.
Unfortunately, (a) has not happened. Magnus seems to feel that Andrew
has not provided sufficient details about which version he should be
running and whether it will likely break anything, and I gather that
Andrew feels otherwise. Figuring out who is right and who is wrong
and what to do about it is above my pay grade, but it would be really
nice if someone could get this straightened out.
Meh, who cares who's right or wrong :-)
My main point is I am unsure if this may have any adverse effects, and
I haven't had the time to investigate if it doesor not. Previously
we've just applied a manual correction patch to bring the branch tip
up to the correct state, which is supposedly good enough for the users
of the git server. In which case, someone just needs to proide said
patch :-)
Given that the repo's remaining lifetime is measured in weeks, that
seems reasonable.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
