Hi, On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:47:54PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Jeff Rizzo <riz%tastylime.net@localhost>: That you're seeing flakiness now suggests > the tools are badly maintained. Which is unfortunare news, but not > irretrievable. I have infrastructure inside reposurgeon to build exporters > (fast-import-stream -> target-system) based only on access to the target > system's CLI. If I have to write one for Mercurial I will. > > > Thus far, the fastest and most reliable tool we have is for conversion > > from CVS to fossil (written by J?rg Sonnenberger, who maintains the github > > NetBSD mirror) - unfortunately, fossil itself has issues working with a > > dataset the size of the NetBSD repo, and is not currently a good > > end-choice. > > Agreed. I understand why exactly - mentioned it in previous email here. I > hope the Fossil fans in NetBSD-land are realistic about this. I'm realistic on this; i know fossil needs some work and if i had time i'd volunteer for it. Considering fossil's mission-statement i always wondered why their main developers didn't take it hands-on directly since its a good `huge repo' check :) As for other repo types, i'm curious about Hg but git is not really an option IMHO; its far too easy to screw up a git repo. I once thought i had it too with fossil i have to admit but it turned out to be fixable and has never repeated itself; and i am not that good a power-user of fossil ;) Another big NONO for git is its half-baken support for sub-repos. Sure one can get links to other repos in a tree but it fails to have a decent recursive update and recursive diff .... not very usefull thus. Cheers, Reinoud
Attachment:
pgpPW5qlEN431.pgp
Description: PGP signature