Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Actually, such a correction patch would be nice and short. Attached
>>> for reference. Thoughts?
>> That seems better than rewinding the history all the way back to August.
>
> It seems pretty horrible to me. That means we'll have a range of
> times 5 months long for which the git repository doesn't match CVS.
>
> Admittedly, I understand that this is going to be extremely painful
> for anyone who (like Heikki) has to manage a substantial private
> branch.
I won't object to rewinding, it should be fairly painless to rebase.
> I haven't been in a hurry to see us move to git because the git mirror
> is, for most purposes, just as good. But if the git mirror is going
> to start sucking, then I'm in a hurry. The way I used to work before
> I learned git seems laughable now, and I do NOT want to go back.
My feelings exactly. I'm not in a hurry to switch because the mirror is
good enough for me. But if *I* have to spend time fixing the mirror
every few weeks, I'm not happy. Magnus has been kind enough to handle
the last mirror troubles, but I believe hë́ shares the feeling.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
