> PS: Does it really matter if the history is a bit altered by the
> conversion process? As long as HEAD and the tags are the same?
I think we can tolerate some minor discrepancies, but we do want
1. Diff-free HEAD, tags, and tips of branches
2. A sensible-looking development history that represents more or less
what happened in CVS
If we only pay attention to (1), we lose too much information, since,
e.g., development history can be critical in determining when a bug
was introduced and what releases it affects.
> The history could be kept in a read-only cvs-repository :-)
Or we could keep a git mirror and you submit patches that are applied
to the CVS repo, which you then pull into your repo through
git-cvsimport once they're committed. There are all sorts of technical
tricks we can play, but I think the goal is to minimize that, and
essentially have a git repo representing the entire development
history as if pgjdbc had been using git from day one.
---
Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso
1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
Foster City, CA 94404
(650) 242-3500 Main
www.truviso.com