Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ignore commits for which cvsps can't identify a branch

From: Christian Biesinger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 23:02:11 +0100

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Does continuing with this kind of "fixups" produce usable
> history, perhaps just some changes missing but trees contained
> in other commits are still faithful reproductions of what the
> CVS repository would have given you?  Or does it result in
> unusable history?

I have to admit that I can't actually tell you for sure, since I still 
get a failure later (I think it's because cvsps orders changesets 
wrongly). However, I was told that the revisions that give me this 
CVSPS_NO_BRANCH issue came into existence by (partially) removing tags 
from a file, so not listing them should be fine, I think. (This happened 
by copying a ,v file and removing its tags, simulating a file copy)

Anyway, based on that, I expect that the history is the same as what I 
get from cvs, but I can't verify that.

> Depending on the nature of corruption and its expected use,
> sometimes silently corrupt conversion result is worse than not
> having it at all.

Well, without the patch this error is fatal, and the conversion is very 
partial. I'm not sure if that's better.

(This is also not "silent" corruption. I do show a message for it. Would 
you rather have it displayed unconditionally?)

Would it be better to have a flag --continue-on-errors?