Re: git copies of cvs modules available

[Curt Sampson <cjs%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On 2009-11-12 18:23 -0500 (Thu), Greg A. Woods wrote:

> Perhaps SVK was a fine tool for users forced to use SVN, but I think SVN
> was always the wrong answer to the question.  :-)

Thinking about it now, I'm not sure why I brought up svk; it's apparent
to me now that git-svn is probably a better tool for doing more or less
the same thing, except for perhaps svn repo backup, where you may want
to build a new svn repo after losing the original in cases where you
don't have rsync access to the raw repo itself.

As well as the usual stuff you can find on the web about git-svn, I have
some notes that may be illuminating. Note that this is a draft blog post
on which I'm soliciting feedback (for about the next day or two), so feel
free to mail me with any. It will have a final edit and move to a permanent
URL soon, so you probably don't want to distribute this URL widely.

 http://www.starling-software.com/en/blog/drafts/2009/11/10.git-notes-draft.html

As I mentioned in a previous message, I think that, for non-committers,
it will make little difference whether we move the repo to svn and
they use git-svn, or whether we move the repo to git directly. The
main difference will be seen by committers who are merging patches
from non-committers. So long as we would provide anonymous svn access
to non-committers, the non-committer experience is probably not a big
factor in the decision to go with svn vs. git.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson       <cjs%starling-software.com@localhost>        +81 90 7737 2974
           Functional programming in all senses of the word:
                   http://www.starling-software.com