[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Locks on the Bzr repository

From: Stephen J. Turnbull
Subject: Re: Locks on the Bzr repository
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 00:54:36 +0900

Uday S Reddy writes:

 > > This information is lost by the rebase.  And in fact, it may be
 > > that the design of B is cleaner or more central to future
 > > development, so that you really want to fix A, and leave B alone.
 > > So bisecting may lead to poor selection of fixes.

 > I think the loss of information is a myth.

Unfortunately, it's not.  YMMV, but some people do value the
information that is lost by rebasing.

I suspect that most Emacs people won't care, though, and will prefer
the more easily reviewed rebased branches.

 > Information will be lost only if the VCS deliberately loses it.
 > There is no reason why the VCS can't keep track of B1...Bm in terms
 > of patches on A1 as well as patches on An.  You can then rebase it
 > forwards and backwards as often as you need to, to get the
 > information you want.

You just invented "Darcs".

 > http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/2009/04/truce-in-merge-vs-rebase-war.html

Note that Haggerty is also basically trying to invent Darcs, but
doesn't quite get there.  It's also very similar to Robert Collins'
loom plugin for bzr.  The idea of loom is to allow flexible traversal
of such complex DAGs during development so that patches can be applied
to the right "thread" of the loom, then propagated "upward" to the
current version automatically.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]