From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-51913-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1SXWqN-0007J3-JX
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:08:39 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2AD76E07F6;
	Thu, 24 May 2012 12:08:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A200E078C
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:06:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: djc)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4B961B4030
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:06:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so6360377wer.40
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 05:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.138.130 with SMTP id a2mr16770621wej.35.1337861171090;
 Thu, 24 May 2012 05:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.168.82 with HTTP; Thu, 24 May 2012 05:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <pan.2012.05.24.11.43.48@cox.net>
References: <4FBCDB3D.1070009@gentoo.org> <2887754.yItCG0zenD@smorgbox>
 <pan.2012.05.24.06.33.53@cox.net> <5715947.t4S3h9H3z4@smorgbox> <pan.2012.05.24.11.43.48@cox.net>
From: Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:05:50 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKmKYaAALu6YBxQsFB5zr9KoMC2th8741KwkRvtVbck5vmBEuw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 250b44d3-8619-4e2e-bb62-85f2c8cb4e0a
X-Archives-Hash: 5a0fb15f892850a9d084dc731eae30dd

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> In that regard, git is nothing like for instance svn, where branches come
> at a much higher cost, as does merging between them.

That's wrong. SVN branches are just about as cheap as git branches,
although merges used to be much more painful. I'm not sure how good
merging in recent SVN is.

Let's please stay a little on-topic? The migration will get there much
faster if we don't succumb to feature creep.

Cheers,

Dirkjan