On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Brooks Davis <brooks_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 08:32:53AM +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: >> This is not entirely true, the cvs_at_ archive details almost all CVS >> repo copies. There are also lots of forced commits to denote repo >> copies. Yes, it would have to be a manual process, where you gather >> (old, new, revision) tuples for the time of the repo copy (and perhaps >> the branch?) >> This file could then augment the conversion process and handle the CVS >> files more intelligently. >> >> I'm not volunteering and am happy with what's been done anyway. I'm >> just against the "this can never ever been fixed, because the >> information is totally lost" attitude. > > Some of the information exists scattered across the archive, much of it > probably does not since at one point committers had direct access to the > repo and used it. The forced commit rule has been forgotten many times. > A partial reconstruction might be possible if someone wanted to waste a > few months of their life. Ok, I'm not that familiar with the RCS format, but couldn't this algorithm catch 97% of the affected files? - Grab content from rev 1.1 of each file and build MD5 sum - files whose rev 1.1 is the same have probably been repocopied - the point in time, where file A is no longer comitted to, and file B has the first commit which is not also in file A, that's when the copy happened I think tools like fromcvs/tohg do a pretty good job at capturing these instances. Cheers, UliReceived on Wed Jun 04 2008 - 10:56:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:31 UTC