[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] reminder: winning smallish project

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] reminder: winning smallish project
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:53:42 -0700 (PDT)

    > From: Robert Collins <address@hidden>

    > Seriously though, for a UI to expose the diference how about:

    > : to remove a revisions-patch & contents from your tree.
    > replay --remove <revision>

    > : to reverse the code changes
    > replay --reverse <revision>

    > : to apply a changeset in reverse
    > dopatch --reverse

    > I'm not sure the above is right, 

I'd guess you're sure it's wrong :-)

What you called `replay --remove' is harmonious with `dopatch

What you called `replay --reverse' is dissonant with `dopatch

And the pivot point here, `dopatch --reverse', is harmonious with
`patch(1)' who is older than us, has better insurance, and who I've
heard has a really tough and mean big brother.

(And, btw, ':' is a terrible character to use that way.)

I'm sure what you really meant is:

    * to reverse the code changes and remove the associated patch log

        % tla replay --reverse <revision>

    * to reverse only the code changes, leaving the patch log as-is:
        % tla replay --opposite <revision>

    * to apply a changeset in reverse (which, if the changeset adds
      patch log entries, will remove them):

        % tla dopatch --reverse [...]

    * to apply a changeset in reverse EXCEPT -- without changing the 
      patch-log entries:

        % tla dopatch --opposite [...]

(Which amounts to almost exactly what you said except that this
version "smells more like Tom" :-)

    > just provoking discussion.
    > Key point: dopatch should be ignorant of the patch logs, so it doesn't
    > need a 'reverse but keep logs' concept. 

BZZT.  Thank you for playing.  No, I think it is a pretty cool feature
of arch that the patch-log changes associated with archive
transactions work out to be ordinary, non-special uses of
mkpatch/dopatch.   Therefore, mkpatch/dopatch _do_ need a special
option if you want to ask them to overlook the patch log.

Say, all this is fine, but, um...  who's going to take the 3hrs to
actually do it?


reply via email to

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