On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 06:30:49PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Roger Leigh wrote: > > Dodgy tags: > > 2.86.ds1-12
% git merge-base master 2.86.ds1-12 6c7ff7973df838277e50ace2fac964870b232e55 This contains an extra "tag" commit: % git log 6c7ff7973..2.86.ds1-12 commit 0e4157678a00ecc87ed21b765b68257f6bab2946 Merge: 7ef23ed 6c7ff79 e13ea70 Author: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[email protected]> Date: Fri Feb 10 00:17:16 2006 +0000 tagging version 2.86.ds1-12 This was either tagged twice (svn2git stripped the last), or there was some odd inconsistency in the repo that prevented it. gitk shows two merges here. Easily fixed though--we can just tag the parent commit 6c7ff7973; the tag commit contains no tree changes, just a commit entry. > > 2.86.ds1-13 Same here (428a9620 is the correct commit to tag) > > 2.86.ds1-22[.new[@936]] This one contains two real commits with tree changes after the last common commit (87f6c32c). This once can't be fixed by moving the tag to a different commit. % git log 87f6c32c..2.86.ds1-22 commit ea266eee14406dee3ead64ab9b4d32ed0e6f8885 Author: Petter Reinholdtsen <[email protected]> Date: Sat Sep 16 10:41:47 2006 +0000 Correct tags. commit 6b7f63bddd44e96daeb481eec0f196abe48ac650 Merge: b3e6d86 87f6c32 Author: Petter Reinholdtsen <[email protected]> Date: Sat Sep 16 10:17:15 2006 +0000 tagging version 2.86.ds1-22 > > 2.86.ds1-31 Actually OK, but something odd happened during the conversion. The end result is OK though. It created a backup tag on the previous commit for some reason. > > 2.86.ds1-34 Also OK, for the same reason as 2.86.ds1-31. > > These all appear in git as incomplete merges. They exist as tags > > but are not attached to any branch (i.e. unlike all other tags > > are not in the history for master). "git svn" gave incorrect > > history for these. "svn2git" correctly reproduces the tree, but > > it's not part of the history for any specific branch. You can > > easily create such a branch with "git checkout -b $tag". > > I guess these were a result of making a commit to the tag after > > branching from master, since in svn a tag is just a directory. > > Hmm, can we track whomever did those commits and check with them if they > were not "lost" changes, or stuff we ended up shipping as a stable/security > update? Absolutely, it's all recorded in the history, as shown above. So we basically have two fixable, two OK which don't need any changes, and one which is AFAICT unfixable (2.86.ds1-22). There's nothing "lost" though--it's just not on the master branch--you can check it out using the tag name any you still have everything. And we could create a special branch to hold 2.86.ds1-22 if you want it on a branch. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-sysvinit-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-sysvinit-devel
