Re: cvs2git reports a "sprout" from a nonexistent commit?

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> ...  I am not sure there is really
>> much point in keeping these ancient branches and tags.  I'd argue for
>> losing all branches and tags that don't start with REL except perhaps
>> for PG95-1_01.  Nobody's going to care about those anyway, and in the
>> very unlikely event that they do, they can refer back to CVS.
>
> Well, my original opinion was pretty much that; but we are close enough
> to having the complete history in the git conversion that I would like
> to be able to say that we won't need the CVS repository any more after
> we convert.
>
> I'm currently down to three unexplainable oddities: these two commits
> related to the Release_2_0 and Release_2_0_0 tags, and the branch point
> for the REL2_0B branch.  The latter situation looks like this:
>
> commit 2032a1fe70f689059476cec5b0ed950078b680c9 582c2ba6a83a58fde8e34d1247f4e987cbe1a622        refs/heads/REL2_0B
> Author: Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
> Date:   Tue Dec 10 03:29:41 1996 +0000
>
>    Test two...branch REL2_0B works...I think
>
> M       src/Makefile
>
> commit 0861594cb3835bdf1cfbfe60884386c18df9ff64 9e60c1711d359f2cefe18c0b62f76a182aadfbd5        refs/tags/release-6-3
> Author: Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
> Date:   Tue Dec 10 03:03:36 1996 +0000
>
>    No change...just a test to make sure I didn't screw anything up
>
> M       src/Makefile
>
> commit 9e60c1711d359f2cefe18c0b62f76a182aadfbd5 33edbdb59b741daed0b26b7033b1ce1b3e70b453        refs/tags/release-6-3
> Author: Bryan Henderson <bryanh(at)giraffe(dot)netgate(dot)net>
> Date:   Mon Dec 9 01:55:51 1996 +0000
>
>    Monitor has been obsoleted by psql.
>
> D       src/bin/monitor/Makefile
> D       src/bin/monitor/monitor.c
>
> commit 582c2ba6a83a58fde8e34d1247f4e987cbe1a622 33edbdb59b741daed0b26b7033b1ce1b3e70b453        refs/tags/REL2_0
> Author: PostgreSQL Daemon <webmaster(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> Date:   Mon Dec 9 01:24:54 1996 +0000
>
>    This commit was manufactured by cvs2svn to create branch 'REL2_0B'.
>
>    Sprout from master 1996-12-09 01:24:53 UTC Bryan Henderson <bryanh(at)giraffe(dot)netgate(dot)net> 'Remove include of libpq-fe.h.  This file has nothing to do with libpq.'
>    Delete:
>        src/bin/monitor/Makefile
>        src/bin/monitor/monitor.c
>
> D       src/bin/monitor/Makefile
> D       src/bin/monitor/monitor.c
>
> commit 33edbdb59b741daed0b26b7033b1ce1b3e70b453 79729c0e5efab44c764a69ceaa9d52ecd6be1ce5        refs/tags/release-6-3
> Author: Bryan Henderson <bryanh(at)giraffe(dot)netgate(dot)net>
> Date:   Mon Dec 9 01:24:53 1996 +0000
>
>    Remove include of libpq-fe.h.  This file has nothing to do with libpq.
>
> M       src/test/regress/regress.c
>
> Now as far as I can tell, the branch was made immediately before those
> test commits you can see Marc making in each branch.  In particular,
> it was definitely made *after* Bryan deleted the src/bin/monitor files,
> because neither of them have REL2_0 or REL2_0B tags.  So why did cvs2git
> choose to sprout the branch from the commit before that, and have to
> duplicate the deletion of the files?  This sure looks like a bug to me.
> It's a minor issue of course, and I don't have a problem with accepting
> the history as shown above, but I'm curious why it's doing that.

Eh, any chance you can throw this conversion up somewhere I can look at it?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company