From owner-freebsd-git@freebsd.org Tue Sep 24 14:03:14 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-git@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECFA4127960 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:03:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46d2w16N4vz4Vp5 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:03:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id z19so4735984ior.0 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:03:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MplZFWS1jLMKWKfE2HyefWyI/sgjjWG1EZkls6+u7So=; b=tuDOyc0UzP04HGweAG/gOg2hmPejfbOSUKsyTsgbhaEwc1haOG69+GCU9gdbtFFfad 3YBNMav7nVQauHYhZZPfx7ErGQIbn2fN2L21D04vs7YEUwPiqjyPAzb4wg3bZ8DFk9cr WRTasuo0/r6cZjPgw2OF2Vn7dfd0CsuFrC/j43bxALhGehgSaWi/E/pxOLutUmX6lDaG DpDdt+aMt1LwAe0sB/X28Ej2XXSb9eyjjcV2EiooiBW694sGZf9devitIjnBX8z4Zfi5 d54AelMPdHSXhJeL1f1aLuTl6gAEsYmVfb+LTZcxEUAYyfR6PeY9Z2j85vTkxkZ5pUfT SRCA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXt9lBSTq+KA2bHpmfmszODDSOgnYhz0Lihz5Zk/cSLNMLQnGT6 7ProYxmqd61WYfHEGcjsJ5WiR1Wi2RCXlrrn4dLPK/6N X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxYUPuMliL8oYVuBb7aa3BkbDTVQ1io93T7FgeSDMFmIKXefSWZnitD0G/hjqEkd01ZjuVfZT12S1E6KMswsPo= X-Received: by 2002:a02:ba12:: with SMTP id z18mr3962449jan.16.1569333791977; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:03:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190923183424.ebnghzf67mx56aom@mutt-hbsd> In-Reply-To: From: Ed Maste Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 10:02:58 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Service disruption: git converter currently down To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ulrich_Sp=C3=B6rlein?= Cc: Shawn Webb , freebsd-git@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46d2w16N4vz4Vp5 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.166.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.28 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-git@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[46.166.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-2.28)[ip: (-5.88), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.30), asn: 15169(-2.20), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[46.166.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-git@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of git use in the FreeBSD project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:03:15 -0000 On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 14:42, Ulrich Sp=C3=B6rlein w= rote: > > Is there really that much value in having "git blame" work in that enviro= nment? > My mental model is of short-lived branches that get upstreamed, so I'm bi= ased > towards this not being all that big of a problem (for some at least). For FreeBSD developers working against the git mirror and committing to SVN I agree it's not much of a concern. But we have a significant number of downstream consumers using the git mirror with long-lived derived branches and churn here is going to be somewhat painful. I suspect your suggestion about merging from both broken and fixed to the derived branch is the most usable solution for folks using a long-lived merge workflow. > I'm 80% sure that you can just merge both branches and things will be fin= e > (though the exact incantation will surely be black magic). I'd love to > try this on > an actual repo though, I don't have the time to craft some test repo to v= erify > this assumption, and then find out that other repos are different). Yes, once we have some time to rerun the conversion (using new branch/merge configuration for the stable/10 issue) we should test this out.