Re: Switching CEDET from CVS to a Distributed VCS.

[David Reitter <david.reitter@gmail.com>]

On Jun 28, 2009, at 10:04 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> Instead of parsing the patch and/or log for meta data, applying the
> patch and committing with "bzr commit"?  That's creative.  Good idea,
> and good luck with it, it deserves a try.

git-mailinfo exposes the functions to parse a patch into commit  
message and patch.
You get the usual meta data as well.

> This would be an amazing time sink for the Savannah people, is my
> guess.  Not a good idea -- a lot of people would use it and conflicts
> would be frequent, I think.

Point well taken.  Still, Savannah already has an excellent git mirror.

> In theory you could use incremental fastimport format as a wire
> protocol, but I wouldn't want to try that without core support from
> the bzr devs.

Yes.   Just worried about automatically creating and pushing very bad  
revisions.
>
> The git->bzr pushthrough script would try to do a bzr->git merge
> first, of course.

I was hoping that all that will remain outsourced, as it is now.  I've  
had plenty of bad experiences with importing (CVS mostly) into bzr;   
perhaps the route bzr->git is easier, but a working and safe two-way  
sync.. . Like you say:

> Trying to maintain bidirectional synchronization is going
> to drive somebody crazy.

For this reason I was wondering if the patch-bundle route would be a  
clean way to push stuff to bzr.