Stephan Kulow wrote:

> Am Friday 18 February 2005 03:14 schrieb Kevin Puetz:
>> Of course, one could munge up the date revprops on the old versions to
>> make them useless but monotonic, and then it would work right for new
>> stuff.
> But that's a too high price
> 
> Greetings, Stephan

The real dates could be put into the log comment as part of the munging, or
placed into an 'olddate' revprop (or both). Since you're going to have to
read the logs anyway to find revisions if they aren't monotonic, putting
the historical dates into something other than svn:date wouldn't be *so*
bad.

Or, there's the alternate conversion approach I laid out, which leaves you
with old history in cvs and new development in svn for a week, rather than
without VCS for a week. But it lets you do the conversion of history in one
sweep, so the dates come out monotonic.

But one other thing I just realized is that this issue is going to recur.
What do we want to do with projects that get imported into KDE svn from
outside in the post-conversion future? If there's development history that
they want loaded, it will pose the same problem of messing up the
requirement that dates be monotonic against revnum... and we're back to the
"checkout by date doesn't work in KDE" or "some 'old' dates have been
munged to make them monotonic" decision.