On 7/7/10, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > 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 $PostgreSQL: tgl blah blah$.
>
>
> Really? All of them? Seems like that would have taken some intentional
> processing somewhere.
AFAIK that's what CVS actually keeps in repo, it expands keywords
when writing files out.
> If we could make the conversion work like that (rather than removing the
> whole line) it would negate my line-number-change argument, which might
> mean that files pulled from the repository would be "close enough" to
> their actual historical form that no one would mind. It's still a
> judgment call though. On balance I think I'd rather adopt the simple
> rule that historical file states in the git repository should match what
> you would have gotten from the cvs repository.
I would prefer that the diffs should match what CVS gives / what got
committed.
Sanity-checking by comparing CVS checkout with GIT checkout with
unexpanded keywords can be scripted easily enough, and is one-time
affair.
But humans want to review old diffs quite more frequently...
+1 keeping keywords, but unexpanded.
--
marko
