Re: Trial git repo is back up

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

On 10/17/2017 06:01 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Daniel J Sebald <dan...@ie...>:
>> On 10/16/2017 01:17 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>>> Trial git repo is back up, with the conversion bug I previously noted fixed.
>>
>> Also, the branches are tags are not in the repository, at least not in the
>> conventional way.  In neither git-gui, gitk nor gitg are there any branches
>> listed other than "master" and "origin > master".  It could be there is some
>> fragments of branches though.  In gitk I look at the visual, colored
>> branches.  There are no bifurcations, but there are occasional colored lines
>> appearing that then go away.  I suspect that those lines are supposed to be
>> the branches.  I'm attaching a small portion of a screen shot illustrating
>> how the line changes color rather than splitting out into branch.
>>
>> My guess is that all the changeset info is there, but the labels that
>> associate branch names with the SHAs are missing.
>>
>> Dan
>>
> 
> CVS branch labels turn into git lightweight tags. Look at the output
> of git tag -l to check whether any tags actually got lost in the conversion.

Tags rather than branches?  I think we'd prefer the CVS branches be 
mapped to git branches.


> The way gitk displays these (or doesn't) is confusing - I've never quite
> understood its rules.  Adding the --tags option shows more of them.

Yes, gitk takes the easy way out by displaying all the commits for a 
branch contiguously, then all the commits for the trunk or another 
branch.  Unlike most viewers, it doesn't seem to be able to display the 
commits chronologically and construct the trellis around that.  qgit is 
similar to gitk (probably using some of the same underlying tools as 
gitk).  So, although it displays things in a way that should be 
understandable, it doesn't really present a convenient view of the graph.

So, let me go back to gitg.  I've placed a screenshot of the test 
repository that was generated with cvsimport here:

http://www.dansebald.com/gnuplot/cvsimport_conversion_Screenshot_from_2017-10-17_11-52-18.png

That conversion has associated git branches with CVS branches, sort of 
what I was expecting.

Dan