CVS or git now?

Peter Rosin
Tue Nov 12 16:00:00 GMT 2013

On 2013-11-12 16:44, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/12/2013 02:41 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> On 2013-11-11 20:27, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> With all the recent conversion to git of the old src/
>>> tree, I am curious where newlib stands.
>> I had a brief browse of
>> and that "mirror" looks poor. It has not retained authorship of
>> the commits, as the committer is always listed as author. Here
>> is one recent example:
> That's they way things always have been in all of the GCC, binutils,
> gdb etc. repositories, with CVS and SVN.

Can't really say I agree. Granted, CVS has no built-in method to
track the author and it only automatically tracks the committer (do
not know about SVN). But authors have been tracked in the ChangeLog
file and a good conversion utility will scrape that info from the
ChangeLog file. If no ChangeLog entry has been made for a specific
commit, I agree that the best thing one can do is to list the
committer as author, but for the majority of changes better info is
readily available.


More information about the Newlib mailing list