Re: Confusion over vender version updates.

[Talden <ta...@gmail.com>]

> 
> > Now unpack your new tree here.  Do
> > git-add .
> > git-commit
> > git-svn dcommit
> >
> > Something like that.  I am just a starter with git, so you'd better
> > experiment yourself.  However, one of the main strengths of git is
> > that it deals with copied and renamed files and split files (move some
> > function elsewhere) while maintaining the history, without the user
> > having to tell git about it.


I thought the more precise definition was that you couldn't tell it about
renames, copies and moves and it simply guesses.  The neat side-effect is
that it might spot split files, the downside being that it might miss a
rename or incorrectly identify an add-remove pair as a rename.

There are a lot of things to like about git... I'm not yet convinced that
the implicit rename is a good one (and isn't the identification of renames
extremely expensive?)

Subversion needs to seriously consider git/mercurial/SVK strengths and think
about implementing many of them (in what would absolutely have to be a
Subversion 2.x) or shut up shop and accept that their membership is going to
dry up a bit.

Of course this is being discussed in some more current posts so it's not
worth discussing here...

In some ways the loaddirs script is making similar guess-work to git (as I
believe it tries to guess renames as well)... Because this is used primarily
for vendor check-ins you don't happen to care about the history and use the
script mainly for it's space/time optimisation.

--
Talden