Re: [Gnu-arch-users] recent changes in address@hidden, and star-merge and update/replay defaults

[Robert Collins]

On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 12:54, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 19:44, Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> > Be that as it may. changing branches by surprise on the user is -not-
> > appropriate for the general case. Consider that the user will still be
> > committing into their own '0.6' version, while getting your 0.7 version
> > changes.
> 
> How will they be committing into their own 0.6?  We're talking about the
> normal case of the user who doesn't have their own branch or anything;
> they just want to use the revision control system to track the
> development of a program.

Is that the 'normal case' ? Most users I encounter that want source want
to customise it. 

> If you were using your own branch, you'd generally be using star-merge;
> if not, then you'd have to know to pass --exact to replay/update.

Not true: replay --skip-present is a good merge tool. As is non exact
replay into a private branch (that is one where the local changes are
not being propogated upstream). 

[description of 3 line config making script]
> Why should everyone have to write these scripts or whatever when there
> is clearly a common pattern here that we can abstract and use?

As Tom says, the common pattern is not yet clear. Saying 'why should
everyone have to X' is a strawman here - I never suggested everyone
should.  And if you write it, perhaps it can be generalised and thrown
up on the wiki etc. Lastly, even if every project does one themselves,
your argument about many end users vs developers suggests the overhead
would be pretty low anyway.

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://members.aardvark.net.au/lifeless/keys.txt>.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part