[Expo-tech] loser git conversion

[Mark Shinwell]

On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 18:27, Wookey <wookey at wookware.org> wrote:

> It's not the end of the world if it's broken back in these early
> revision years, but the data must have worked at the time so we should
> make it so that at least at that one point it processes OK. Having
> come this far and gone to the effort of bringing the CVS history back
> in, I think it's worth trying to finish this off. I think it's really
> quite important to have each year both processable and historically
> accurate for recent years, so whilst we could punt on 2003 if it
> really is too much of a mess, I think we should get the other years
> working, otherwise it's a regression over the hg repo.
>

I'm unsure that some of this is a regression, though.  The sorts of things
I was referring to in my previous email (e.g. changesets with discoveries
from multiple years all at once) will be in hg too.  In fact it might be
worse there, as I explicitly pulled back some of the changesets from a big
ARGE merge somewhere around 2013 so they were in a better position
date-wise in the history.

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wookware.org/pipermail/expo-tech/attachments/20200503/03384271/attachment.htm>