Re: State of the CVS conversion

[sfeam <sf...@us...>]

On Saturday, 04 November 2017 17:17:39 Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> sfeam <sf...@us...>:
> > On Saturday, 04 November 2017 10:30:34 Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > > "Bastian Märkisch" <bma...@we...>:
> > > > There are a few cases which we probably would like to fix because the
> > > > ChangeLog was modified in an "atypical" way.  Should this be done now
> > > > or can this be corrected after the conversion (sorry, not really 
> > > > familiar with git yet)?
> > > 
> > > It can be done either way.  Safest to do it before the cutover, so the
> > > changest get recorded in reconvert and not lost if we do some other
> > > modification.
> > 
> > Could you provide a recipe for making such a correction?
> 
> If you have a speification for a changeset, like say
> 
>    <es...@th...!2017-11-04T16:44:25>
> 
> you can say
> 
> reposurgeon
> reposrgeon> read gnuplot
> reposurgeon> <es...@th...!2017-11-04T16:44:25> setfield author "Frd J. Foonly <fr...@fo...>"
> reposurgeon rebuild
> 
> Of course, you can do more tham one of these per session.

You lost me. 
How would I have a specification for a changeset in that form?
If this is editing the cvs copy, how is it better than using sed or vi to
do the same thing?
 
> However, after doing this you need to run forcepush to put the new
> repo in place.  Patches done between your last pull and the foecepush
> will be lost.

Push it where?  Back to SourceForge?

I think I'm not going to touch any of this.  If Dan or Bastian or you send me
an updated reconvert script I'd be happy to run it, but I worry I'll do more
harm than good if I start editing with unfamiliar tools.

> > I've pushed some trivial patches against branch-5-2-stable so
> > the git content has already  diverged in minor ways from the cvs version.
> > No real harm will be done if the conversion is re-executed with fewer
> > rough corners.  Just let me know if that's the plan.
> 
> The plan is up to you.  But it looks like you did 'reconvert' rather than
> 'reconvert finish', so you probably want to do one more reconvert run.

Oops. Yeah, I missed that.
Sigh.
That means I have to blow away the sf.net repository, reinitialize,
and push from the local copy again.  Right?

 
> You don't need to lose your work. From your command line
> 
> git checkout branch-5-2-stable
> git format-patch HEAD~3..HEAD
> 
> This will make some patch files with the prefix 000* that you can reapply
> to a git repo with the 'git am' command.

Thanks, that's useful.
In this case I have all the patches anyhow but I can see that's useful
for catching changes by other people.

> > Oh - one other question.
> > Can other people actually see the files inside branch-X-X-stable
> > via the SourceForge web view interface?   I find that in order to
> > make this work I have to hit the "Repository Refresh" button.
> > Thing is, that button is in a tab marked "admin-git-main" that 
> > I don't think normal users can see.  
> 
> Look off to the left of the main window in the SourceForge web GUI.  You'll
> see buttons you can use to select a branch for viewing.  They work for me.

Good to know.
They work for me also, but they don't seem to show recent changes until
I hit the "Repository Refresh" button.
 
> There is something strange going on, though.  I can see all branches in
> the GUI, but if I
> 
>     git clone ssh://esr@git.code.sf.net/p/gnuplot/git-main
> 
> I only get the master branch!  How did you do your clone?

Since I don't have any prior expectations, I can't say whether I got everything
at once or not.  How would I tell?  

Here's what I did:

$ git clone ssh://sfeam@git.code.sf.net/p/gnuplot/git-main gnuplot-git-main

$ cd gnuplot-git-main
   # Now the current directory tree holds what looks like the current tip files
   # However gitk run in this same directory shows all the branches,
   # so I figured the rest are packed in ./.git somewhere to be reconstructed
   # on demand.  No?
   # The gitk GUI run from here pushes to origin

$ git checkout -track origin/branch-5-2-stable
   # Magically the contents of the current directory tree switch to the branch tip
   # I was surprised, but since I didn't know otherwise I assumed this was OK
   # Did it unpack them from the local copy or pull for sf.net?  I don't know.
   # The gitk GUI run from here now pushes to origin/branch-5-2-stable

That's as far as I got, but it was sufficient to show that I could use gitk to
modify either the main branch or the 5-2-stable branch.

	Ethan