Git or Hg bridge to SVN [closed]

Question

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.

Closed 8 years ago.

Improve this question

What are reasons to not use a git-svn bridge or an hgsubversion bridge? What are some blatant problems with using a bridge as opposed to fully switching to Git or Mercurial?

I assume the bridge will still be plagued by the slow SVN speeds right?

Thank you.

Answer 1

HGSubversion

• You can't push mergesets to Subversion and must to rebase before push
• You can't use pushable to Subversion Mercurial repo as source for sequential clones: Mercurial rewrites all pushed changesets (thus - change hash) and you'll get copies of full history in each child repo on pull-after-push-to-SVN from parent Mercurial repo, linked to Subversion: bidirectional sync (external Mercurial - Mercurial with hgsubversion - SVN) will not work
• Subversion's merges aren't processed as merges and shown and used as ordinary (single-parent) Mercurial revisions