[Geany-devel] Git conversion completed

[Jiří Techet]

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 13:55, Colomban Wendling
<lists.ban at herbesfolles.org> wrote:
> Le 09/10/2011 02:13, Jiří Techet a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've completed the conversion to git. It went quite smoothly because I
>> did it already before and fortunately the checksums remained the same
>> so I could reuse the grafts files I already had (to be sure, I checked
>> all the entries one by one).
>>
>> The repository is here:
>>
>> https://github.com/techee/geany
>>
>> Please have a good look at it. It's no problem to change it now but it
>> will be hard once people start using it. For this reason please resist
>> the temptation and don't update your branches on top of the repository
>> yet. It's safer to wait until everyone agrees the repository is
>> alright.
>
> Looks good, great job again! :)
>
> Just a few questions/remarks:
>
> * the unstable branch don't seem to be always removed after merging, yet
> it is re-created (4f20d88, 2f9719e).  This seem not correct since
> according to svn, in both commits the branch was actually created.
>
> * why does 3155474 have two parents?  It's supposed to be a new branch
> out of 3a4a5b6; the old build-system branch was removed in r3939
> (previous rev).

These two are exactly the points 2 and 4 from

http://lists.uvena.de/geany-devel/2011-September/005232.html

The problem is that svn2git doesn't delete the branch after merging it
so when the branch is re-crated, it has two parents - the current
trunk and the last commit from the branch before it was merged. This
was the case both for the unstable branch and configurable menu branch
which existed before already.

I was asking whether to to fix these and the answer was that it's not
so important but you're right it looks strange so I'll go through the
repository and fix the most obvious cases. It's not much work anyway.

>
> * 03c3b75 (r3679) is a bit weird too, it has d3cdd27 (r3680) as parent,
> but as the SVN revision suggests, d3cdd27 is newer than it (13:53:04 vs
> 13:45:47).  And I don't see from SVN log why this would be wanted.

This is apparently my error - judging from the date I should have used
d71d352 for "merge trunk changes". I'll fix that.

Cheers,
Jiri