-Git for CVS users
+git for CVS users
=================
-v0.99.5, Aug 2005
Ok, so you're a CVS user. That's ok, it's a treatable condition, and the
first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. The fact that
already.
The thing about CVS is that it absolutely sucks as a source control
-manager, and you'll thus be happy with almost anything else. Git,
+manager, and you'll thus be happy with almost anything else. git,
however, may be a bit 'too' different (read: "good") for your taste, and
does a lot of things differently.
basically a tool for tracking 'file' history, while git is a tool for
tracking 'project' history. This sometimes causes problems if you are
used to doing very strange things in CVS, in particular if you're doing
-things like making branches of just a subset of the project. Git can't
+things like making branches of just a subset of the project. git can't
track that, since git never tracks things on the level of an individual
file, only on the whole project level.
people think it's a bug in CVS that makes it tag (and check in changes)
one file at a time. So most projects you'll ever see will use CVS
'as if' it was sane. In which case you'll find it very easy indeed to
-move over to Git.
+move over to git.
First off: this is not a git tutorial. See
link:tutorial.html[Documentation/tutorial.txt] for how git
Second: CVS has the notion of a "repository" as opposed to the thing
that you're actually working in (your working directory, or your
-"checked out tree"). Git does not have that notion at all, and all git
+"checked out tree"). git does not have that notion at all, and all git
working directories 'are' the repositories. However, you can easily
emulate the CVS model by having one special "global repository", which
people can synchronize with. See details later, but in the meantime
how to commit stuff etc in git) is to create a git'ified version of your
CVS archive.
-Happily, that's very easy indeed. Git will do it for you, although git
+Happily, that's very easy indeed. git will do it for you, although git
will need the help of a program called "cvsps":
http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
there that can be used to get equivalent information (see the git
mailing list archives for details).
-Git has a couple of alternatives, though, that you may find sufficient
+git has a couple of alternatives, though, that you may find sufficient
or even superior depending on your use. One is called "git-whatchanged"
(for obvious reasons) and the other one is called "pickaxe" ("a tool for
the software archeologist").
Also, in the original context, the same statement might have
appeared at first in a different file and later the file was
renamed to "a-file.c". CVS annotate would not help you to go
-back across such a rename, but GIT would still help you in such
+back across such a rename, but git would still help you in such
a situation. For that, you can give the -C flag to
git-diff-tree, like this:
"o-file.c", it would find the commit that changed the statement
when it was in "o-file.c".
-NOTE: The current versions of "git-diff-tree -C" is not eager
+NOTE: The current version of "git-diff-tree -C" is not eager
enough to find copies, and it will miss the fact that a-file.c
was created by copying o-file.c unless o-file.c was somehow
changed in the same commit.