Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 08:06:32PM -0700, Dustin Sallings wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, Sep 25, 2003, at 15:41 US/Pacific, Pau Aliagas wrote:
> 
> >Well, we have "express commits": tla commit -L "your explanations".
> >Combining both like CVS is just unimportant because you could have an
> >alias in your shell to do it. Once you get used it's evenbetter to 
> >have it
> >this way because you can fill in the log as you do the changes. See, it
> >makes you work better.
> 
>       Not that the model seems strange to me or anything, but I don't 
>       think that it's valid to generally assert that adding a new step to a 
> process necessarily makes the process better.
> 
>       I usually don't do any logging before a commit.  It'd be nice to be 
> able to do perforce/cvs style commits with notes, I think.  Of course, 
> if in the end, we only have one model, I like the one we have.
> 
>       OpenCM does both in that you can edit your future checkin message at 
> any time up to the checkin (at which point it will be presented to you 
> for your final edit).  I think the important aspect of the OpenCM model 
> is that the user gets to choose the appropriate time to enter logs.

Agreed.

>       I think it's best to offer suggestions (as defaults) for how things 
> should work, but still let users create their own work flow.  For 
> example, I really like the explicit tagging method and thing it's a 
> good default, but some people like other methods.

I will answer this separately to another email that is more on topic.

Andrea - If you prefer relying on open source software, check these links:
            rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.[45]/
            http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
            svn://svn.kernel.org/linux-2.[46]/trunk