Re: Todays git migration results

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Todays git migration results
Date: 2010-08-16 18:27:21
Message-ID: 18840.1281983241@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:11, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> The other thing that I'd like to see some data on is the commit log
>> entries. Can we produce anything comparable to cvs2cl output from
>> the test repository?

> For a single branch, just do "git log <branchname>", e.g. "git log
> master" or "git log REL8_2_STABLE" on your clone.

> Is that enough, or do you need one for all branches at once?

Well, I guess there are two sub-parts to my question then. First, and
most important for the immediate issue, have you done anything to verify
the commit-message data matches between the cvs and git repositories?

Second, does git offer a way to collate matching log entries across
multiple branches? The main advantage of cvs2cl has always been that it
would do that, so that you didn't have to look at five independent log
entries after a commit that fixed the same bug in five branches...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2010-08-16 18:32:18 Re: Todays git migration results
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-08-16 18:25:50 Re: Writeable CTEs Desgin Doc on Wiki