Convert from BK
Christopher Li
hg at chrisli.org
Wed Jun 1 23:09:35 UTC 2005
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 06:04:16PM -0700, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > You should get your data from CVS gateway fine. As the metadata, that is
> > the part that I really don't want to get expose to.
>
> I'm afraid I disagree. I think Vincent is well within his rights to do
> whatever he needs to do to recover his data. Especially so as he's in
Yes, he has rights to recover his data. No problems t here.
> the EU. It has no impact on me, at any rate, as I've never touched
> BitKeeper and thus am completely free and clear of any of its
> ridiculous contractual issues. So I look forward to seeing a
That is fine too.
> conversion script.
The problem is the guys who write the conversion script can be link
to "touch the internal implementation of the BK", in other words,
consider BK contaminated. Obvious BK don't want to give out their
merging information, which can be argue to related to how they implement
it. I am not saying they are right. I just want to keep BK free.
It is not worth the trouble to get those meta data.
In the same reason, I will not try auto merge the stuff have been
auto merge by BK, and compare the result with BK. Linus has said that
to me before. I found it hard to accept that the time. Now I look back
I am glad I did not do it that way. It is unavoidable if you start importing
full merge information from BK and keep track of it under home grow tools,
especially I am still developing it.
>
> And frankly, if LM is still pushing his theory about "owning the
> metadata", he's overdue for a CAT scan.
I don't agree with him, but it is just not worthy the trouble for me
to go through that route.
Chris
More information about the Mercurial
mailing list