emaste at freebsd.org
Thu Mar 26 02:36:51 UTC 2020
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 22:06, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 1:33 PM Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 05:20, Ulrich Spörlein <uspoerlein at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > This is intentional, please see https://github.com/freebsd/svn2git/blob/1a0b3e0230e1b2430e5d8eb91ac99aeff5a1614d/src/svn.cpp#L883
>> > Only projects and user branches are represented as merges to master, as they usually have a full tree. This seemed to match the git model better (as opposed to the SVN model).
>> IMO we do want vendor code updates recorded as merges. This is already
>> happening today for certain updates (svn merge -c <rev> updates I
>> believe). For example my most recent ELF Tool Chain vendor update:
> How do we both do subtree to not not have the vendor repos commingled inbour tree and do this?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here, but there's no problem
for us to have the original snapshotted history just as we do with
merges from svn vendor branches today.
More information about the freebsd-git