Re: git: uh-oh

Michael Haggerty <mhagger(at)alum(dot)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> So, if we're prepared to assert that we've never done that, could we
>> have an option to cvs2git that is willing to use the first commit on
>> a branch to represent the act of adding the file to the branch?

> I'm afraid this would be pretty far down on my long todo list.

Fair enough.

> Somebody could use "git filter-branch" to make this change after the
> conversion, but I can't estimate how much work it would be.

The conversion is already far better than I expected it would be when
we were first discussing this switch, so my inclination is to just live
with this one wart.

I spent more time over the weekend comparing various branches' histories
between cvs2cl and Max's repository. I found a lot of places where
cvs2cl had problems :-(, but none where the git history could be blamed.
I'm ready to sign off on this conversion process as being Good Enough,
modulo two points:

* Change the committer name assigned to manufactured commits, as already
mentioned.

* Please make the manufactured commits read "cvs2git" not "cvs2svn".
I don't want people wondering in future when it was we used SVN.

AFAIK both of these are trivial configuration fixes.

regards, tom lane