![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/01aa7d6d4db83982a2f6dd363d0ee0f3.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On May 3, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Barry Warsaw writes:
Your point about interoperability is an important one, and definitely a factor in the decision. I think the risk is mitigated by tools like Tailor,
Tailor is great, but "mitigated" is as far as you can go. The basic stuff like branches and committer id is properly moved from one to the other. However, you can lose some metadata going from one dvcs to another if the target doesn't support it. For example, git supports both author and committer IDs for each commit, which others don't, and git has its signed tags.
So my take away from this is that while a conversion would be /
possible/ it's not completely seamless or automatic. If we choose
wrong, we'll suffer some pain, but we'll recover. ;) Would you say
that's accurate? I could live with that.
- -Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBRjs0x3EjvBPtnXfVAQJ/kAP/SuvnK3sZyiAJSt+xilwWJxF9wOo04Dbw uzk/e8yEOWg8UoAxSZAUny5c+sIb7QI0PI+AWI7gJuUrhu2HM24nAUT1zztmSHk1 pSpAitzHK15uknyntbtS3opYkZPJe/q8qiraITC4PEfvjOF67KbiImWlz+IgU0Kv P5m0f8q5UmQ= =p9+f -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----