On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Markus Wanner <markus@bluegap.ch> wrote:
> If you create separate commits during the conversion, rename that file on
> the master branch
This is all completely irrelevant to the CVS import. I don't think
we've ever renamed files because CVS can't handle it cleanly.
It does sound to me like we really ought to have merge commits marking
the bug fixes in old releases as merged in the equivalent commits to
later branches based on Tom's commit messages.
That would make the git history match Tom's "same commit message"
implicit CVS history that cvs2pcl was giving him. I find git-log's
output including merge commits kind of strange and annoying myself but
having them at least gives us a chance to have a tool that understands
them output something like cvs2pcl. Throwing away that information
because we don't like the clutter in the tool output seems like a
short-sighted plan.
That said, the commit log message isn't being lost. We could always
import the history linearly and add the merge commits later if we
decide having them would help some tool implement cvs2pcl summaries.
--
greg
