Re: [boost] Losing history (Was: [git] Boost.Build location_

Subject: Re: [boost] Losing history (Was: [git] Boost.Build location_
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-27 11:55:23

> On 27.12.2012 04:28, Daniel Pfeifer wrote:
> > 2012/12/26 Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>:
> >> On 12/26/2012 11:48 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 26.12.2012 21:30, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 26.12.2012 13:26, Daniel Pfeifer wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2012/12/26 Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am wondering what will be the location  of Boost.Build after
> >>>>>> the git switch. It seems to be part of
> >>>>>> http://github.com/boost-lib/boost right now.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It has its own repository: https://github.com/boost-lib/build
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh, that's good. Will that eventually include full version history
> >>>> from SVN?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In fact, could this repository be adjusted to be content of current
> >>> tools/build/v2 ?
> >>>
> >>> There's very little practical reason to have history from
> >>> Boost.Build V1 be present in git, and the "v2" directory at the top
> >>> level makes no sense.
> >>
> >>
> >> What I would suggest is that we convert from svn to git manually into
> >> our own repo (since the current bridge doesn't keep history). Then
> >> push the new, full history version, into the boost subrepo.
> >
> > The current bridge is preliminary, but the final conversion will not
> > convert history either.
> > All libraries will start with a fresh git repository without history
> > (History can be made accessible by grafting).
> 
> Wait, what? As far as I'm concerned, conversion to git that loses history
> is simply unacceptable.
> Version control is used for software development for a good reason. Not do
> I find it acceptable to impose history conversion task on every individual
> developer.
> 
> Can somebody from the Steering Committee clarify what's going on here?

Frankly, that particular piece of information is news to me as well. Granted
nobody ever explicitly said history would be preserved in the process (as
far as I remember), but neither did anybody explicitly say it would be lost.
And I missed to ask about this - doh!

I agree losing history or having to manually preserve it is unacceptable.

Regards Hartmut
---------------
http://boost-spirit.com
http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu