On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 20:31, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
>
> Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> So what happens right now using the existing git repository is that
>> the $PostgeSQL$ tags are there, but they're unexpanded. They just say
>> $PostgreSQL$ rather than $PostgreSQL: tgl blah blah$. I'm all in
>> favor of removing them, but it would be nice if we could avoid
>> cluttering the old changesets with useless changes to the keyword
>> expansions.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Personally I favor leaving the expanded keywords in what we import, so that
> there's an exact mapping between what's in the final CVS repo and what's in
> the inital git repo, and then removing them entirely. I don't see that
> having old keyword expansions in the historical changesets is a bid deal.
> Nobody is going to base patches on them (I hope).
This is my general feeling as well. If there are outstanding patches
they will need to be merged, but actually getting a conflict there
would require that someone is working off their own cvs repository
which expands the same tags - which would cause the conflicts today
anyway. other than that, just rebasing across a HEAD that no longer
has the keywords should be a very straightforward operation.
Given that we generally *backpatch* fixes (rather than make them on
backbranches and merge back into head), it shouldn't affect that at
all.
-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
