Subject: Re: [boost] git clone up
From: troy d. straszheim (troy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-08 13:37:53
Christopher Currie wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:20 AM, troy d. straszheim
> <troy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> In case this reaches any other git enthusiasts, I've rigged up a git clone
>> that is automatically tracking boost svn, here:
> There actually is another one of these:
> http://git.jsharpe.net/boost.git (master)
> http://repo.or.cz/r/boost.git (mirror)
> git://repo.or.cz/boost.git (mirror that uses the faster git protocol)
This one has some problems, the release branches aren't mirrored
correctly. The one I have up has problems too... things could be a lot
> Does it matter, since they're both Git? Well, since you're both doing
> doing your own imports, the commit hashes are different, so the two
> repos are incompatible, which is somewhat against the spirit of Git.
Yeah. That the commit hashes are different is a big problem. Brad
King from Kitware is here at boostcon and is really good with git...
he's shown me a Better Way to do this mirroring that enables one to git
svn dcommit directly from the git clone. When I've got this all
grokked, I'll give notice here, put the new one up and take the old one
> While I don't hold out hope that Boost will move to Git anytime soon
> (pretty please?), perhaps it's time that boost.org have an official
> Git mirror, so that folks don't end up re-inventing the wheel? Or
> nominate one of these two (that we know of) to be official?
The thing would be to give it some exercise... I'd be glad to push/pull
some changes to you to try everything out. It'd be nice to see some
kind of experimental megabranch with various vault code in it, like
process and extension.
If things really work out well and we know exactly what we want, I think
there is some chance that we'd be able to get the mirror put on the same
physical machine as the svn repo, which has various advantages over
polling the svn repo via the network.
> Troy, FWIW your HOWTO is very helpful! I hadn't had a need to submit
> patches based off of the jsharpe repo, and was a little uncertain how
> I'd go about it.
Cool, glad to hear it. This should be a lot easier with the new scheme.