[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular
From: |
James Blackwell |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:03:15 -0500 |
> First of all, I am happy to see that some people actually agree with me
> that version-0 and versionfix-N revisions are still useful to something.
>
> It seems that these states are mutually exclusive, though I am not too
> sure about "released nand cycled". If we can agree that these states are
> exclusive it is possible to design a simple set of rules to sort them
> out:
>
> 0. last rev is base-0 or patch-N -> version is open
> 1. last rev is versionfix-N -> version is released
> 2. last rev is version-0
> 2.a: version-0 patchlog has "Seal: closed"
> -> version is closed and hidden by default
> 2.b: version-0 patchlog has "Seal: cycled address@hidden"
> -> version is cycled to the named archive
> 2.c: version-0 patchlog has not "Seal" header or "Seal: release"
> -> version is released
>
> The "Seal:" header provides hints for tools. For abrowse to show or not,
> for merge tools to display a warning when merging with a cycled branch,
> etc.
Two questions:
1. Would you plan to include this Seal line in every versionfix
patchlog?
2. If only version-0 has a Seal: line in the patchlog, but we were at
version-6, would that mean we'd have to get all of the patchlogs and
then go back 6 patchlogs to look to see if Seal: is there?
3. How much of an impact do you think this would have on the running
time of rbrowse?
--
James Blackwell Using I.T. to bring more 570-407-0488
Owner, Inframix business to your business http://inframix.com
GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D 247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], (continued)
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], Robert Collins, 2004/01/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], James Blackwell, 2004/01/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], Robert Collins, 2004/01/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, David Allouche, 2004/01/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular,
James Blackwell <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, Aaron Bentley, 2004/01/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, David Allouche, 2004/01/22
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, David Allouche, 2004/01/22
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], James Blackwell, 2004/01/22
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], James Blackwell, 2004/01/22
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular [was: Re-linking to revlib implemented], Miles Bader, 2004/01/22
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, David Allouche, 2004/01/23
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, Miles Bader, 2004/01/23
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, Aaron Bentley, 2004/01/23
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular, Mirian Crzig Lennox, 2004/01/26