From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Qgit performance and maintain CVS environment with GIT repository Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 01:00:08 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <598689.78740.qm@web56015.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <47159779.6010502@bluelane.com> <200710171800.37345.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> <4717EF40.6000509@bluelane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Marco Costalba , Robin Rosenberg , piet.delaney@gmail.piet.net, Linus Torvalds , VMiklos , free cycle , git@vger.kernel.org, piet.delaney@gmail.com, Piet Delaney To: Pete/Piet Delaney X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 19 02:00:45 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IifIB-0003kv-RN for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 02:00:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761732AbXJSAAa (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:00:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761146AbXJSAAa (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:00:30 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:41506 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1759889AbXJSAA3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:00:29 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2007 00:00:27 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO openvpn-client) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp052) with SMTP; 19 Oct 2007 02:00:27 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+IQO1kdjiI9B0f/7bG5UEvRSIhLMZkPFR411IvVE 1Zm+n6nvdX2NkM X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <4717EF40.6000509@bluelane.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Pete/Piet Delaney wrote: > Johannes: > I read somewhere in the past week that it was possible to maintain > our existing CVS environment with git. I though it was a separate > package to export git back to cvs but I just noticed a git-cvsserver > and as a std part of git and was wondering about using that. Where did you read that? AFAIK git-cvsserver is one option. The other is cvsexportcommit. The former is more appropriate if you want to switch the developers over to git, and want to provide a smooth path for the devs (or cannot convert a few hardcore CVS "fans"). The latter is appropriate if you cannot control the server side, or are not allowed to switch to CVS. > We have a number of build machines with flamebox perl scripts pulling > out CVS branches for builds. I was wondering what is the best way to use > git and it's nicer pull/push model and merge facility and possibly > maintain CVS exports for scripts doing builds if possible the cvsweb and > bonsai (CVS Query Form) that a number of engineers are currently using. I don't know how cvsweb copes with git-cvsserver, but I guess that there will be no problem. > I started looking over out flamebox scripts with the intent up > converting them over to git but I mentioned the git to cvs coexistence > and we are wondering if that's a better route than upgrading the > flamebox scripts. Having our existing cvsweb, bonsai, and gitweb along > with the git utilities seems at least desirable. Any thoughts or > suggestions? My suggestion: if you're fine with CVS, stick with it. Really. I am not here to teach the whole world about the advantages of git, so by all means, if you yourself do not find any advantage to using git, don't use it. Stick with what works for you. Ciao, Dscho