Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 8/26/05, Eric W. Biederman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thinking about it going from arch to git should be just a matter
of checking sha1 hashes, possibly back to the beginning of the
arch tree.
Yup, though actually replaying the tree to compute the
Linus,
I like the solution you are suggesting, but I suspect it will create
more problems that it will solve, and while the coolness factor is
drawing me in we ain't gonna need it, as the xp people say.
More below...
On 8/26/05, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Git won't care, so
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Martin Langhoff wrote:
OTOH, storing the metadata in a branch will allow us to run the import
in alternating repositories. But as Junio points out, unless I can
guarantee that the metadata and the tree are in sync, I cannot
trivially resume the import cycle from a new
On 8/26/05, Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OTOH, storing the metadata in a branch will allow us to run the import
in alternating repositories. But as Junio points out, unless I can
guarantee that the metadata and the tree are in sync, I cannot
trivially resume the import cycle
Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In other words, if you just have a last commit pointer in your
meta-data, then git is _by_definition_ in sync. There's never anything to
get out of sync, because objects aren't going to change.
Hmmm. That repo is in sync, but there are no guarantees
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That kind of extension shouldn't be too hard, and might make tags much
more generally usable (ie you could say I sign these n official
releases or something).
Well, I admit that once I advocated changing tag to bag, but
one problem is how you would
6 matches
Mail list logo
