Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Tutorial Question

[Robert Anderson]

--- Original Message ---
From: "Pierce T. Wetter III" <address@hidden>
To: Arch Users <address@hidden>
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Tutorial Question

>
>  Ok, lets see if I understand branching.
>
>  Ignoring the step where we make yet another archive. (Why is this 
>here? Is this a "best practice" thing that people tend to make a
new 
>archive when they branch? why?)

No.  From what I remember, he's simulating two-developer workflow
here.  It would be common and probably preferred to have an
archive for each developer's branches.

>  There are 3 steps:
>
>   1. Setup a new project directory in the archive:
>
>    tla archive-setup hello-world--punctuated--0.1
>
>   2. Specify the project ancestor
>
>    tla tag
address@hidden/hello-world--mainline--0.1--patch-1 
>hello-world--punctuated--0.1
>
>   2.1 (optional)
>
>    tla cacherev hello-world--punctuated--0.1
>
>  3. Get the source
>
>    tla get hello-world--punctuated--0.1
>
>  Something different from the tutorial version:
>
>    I named the branch "punctuated", not "candice". I think that
makes 
>more sense, because "punctuating" is the purpose of the task, and 
>there's less confusion between the "branch" and the "archive". I 
>recommend changing the tutorial to reflect this.

And when the next change on that branch has some other purpose? 
The idea is that the branch is for Candice's changes, not
necessarily only this one.

But, anyway, arbitrary.  It doesn't matter what it's called.

>  Question:
>
>    Why is this three commands? Why not one?

Because this is only one way to arrange those three commands. 
Sometimes you tag without the other steps, sometimes you cacherev
without the other steps.

I've come to like Tom's algebraic analogy of "basis set spanning
the space"  here.

You're asking something akin to "why doesn't a typewriter just
have keys for each word?  Why do you have to put all these dang
letters together every time?"

Bob