Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: BKCVS issue | Date | Mon, 2 Jun 2003 20:50:51 -0400 |
| |
On Monday 02 June 2003 19:39, Ben Collins wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 07:37:02PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > > On Monday 02 June 2003 17:14, Aaron Lehmann wrote: > > > For the past few days, it seems like every time something changes in > > > BK, the bkcvs repository has all of its files touched. At least, all > > > files in the repository have a P preceding their names on a cvs up. > > > > > > It's not intolerable, but I was wondering if anyone's aware of it. > > > > CVS thinks of changes as having been applied in a certain order, with > > each cange applying to the result of previous changes. > > > > Bitkeeper does not. Each change applies to a historical version of the > > tree, and when it gets two sets of changes based on the same historical > > tree neither one of them goes "before" the other, they both apply to the > > old tree. (This isn't a linear process, it's lots and lots of branches. > > Conflicts don't come up at this point, think quantum indeterminacy and > > the trousers of time and all that.) > > bkcvs doesn't do this. It can't. There's no way for CVS to represent > what BK does. bkcvs is instead linear, but some commits are groups of > changesets instead of single changesets. > > The problem is that bkcvs 2.5 is broken. Larry has said he will fix it, > time permitting.
I was under the impression that the problem in bkcvs was a design issue: it converted a BK repository to a CVS repository by creating a fresh CVS repository from scratch each time. It didn't modify an existing CVS repository, which would be a bit more work.
It's not impossible, I suppose. If you can feed bk the tree version that the old CVS was created against, there's existing logic to create create a gnu-style patch that gets the tree from point B to point C. The only problem with creating a series of CVS entries instead of a patch is keeping the changes seperate when you do it...
Dunno how big a problem that is, I haven't looked at the BK source. I'd like to keep my options open if I decide to work on subversion or some such in the future. :)
Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |