From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8143 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2007 14:19:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 8135 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2007 14:19:48 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:19:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9CEIxdO027900 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:19:42 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9CDuqBb007841; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:56:52 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9CDupxF006231; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:56:52 -0400 Message-ID: <470F7CBD.3020502@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:19:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070530) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tim Moore CC: frysk Subject: Re: vendor branches in git repository References: <470E105E.7000601@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <470E105E.7000601@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q4/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 Tim Moore wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > I've pushed all the vendor branches I could identify to the sourceware .git repository > with the names vendor/LIBUNWIND, etc. Please let me know if anything is missing or > they don't resemble what you imported. The merge points of these branches back into the > main trunk didn't survive the cvs export process (or didn't exist in the first place) so > in Git these branches never appear to be merged back. I'm going to assert that it's not > necessary to massage the history to recreate the merges, as the commits to the mainline > that did the merges are certainly there, but if you disagree, let me know. > > Right, re-discovering the merge points is pretty much impossible; but we've hopefully dropped sufficient tags to find them. vendor/BLAH sounds good! Andrew > What other branches in CVS are important to preserve in the git repository? > > I'm going to do a pass over the git repository to correct email names of contributors, so > don't get too attached to your clones of the current repo; the history will change out > from under you. > > Tim > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFHDhBeeDhWHdXrDRURAr+EAJkBP/JwYKayJxtOKCWtDNQ5HU3jKwCeK2K5 > 1I8slI/L4C18AkdYkLMyBbY= > =xadx > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >