[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: cvs <-> arch mirroring scripts

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: cvs <-> arch mirroring scripts
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:29:12 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 03:16:06PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
>       Revision:     Identifies the arch changeset the change came from;
>                   I think this is very useful information and should be
>                   kept.
> How is that useful to CVS users like me?

Because (1) it identifies which arch revision the change came from, which
allows you to go back to the arch changeset to get more info if you need it,
(2) it helps identify the change as part of a changeset along with other
files, which is a generally useful concept even if not supported by the
mechanics of CVS.

You may not immediately need this info in your everyday log browsing, but
that doesnt mean it's not useful.  However, it does suggest that maybe the
idea of adding output-filtering to vc.el's C-v l command is good.  That way
you can strip out this stuff that may interfere with casual browsing, but
it's available in case you ever _do_ want it.

>       Creator:      This is redundant in this case, but since CVS checkins
>                   from arch probably will occur from a single `gateway user'
>                   so that it's necessary to record the _actual_ author
>                   somewhere.
> 1. We should think of this person as the one who checked in the
> change.  If so, the info is useful but the CVS checkin user info is
> useless.  This name should go in the CVS checkin user name, not in a
> separate "Creator" field.

This is true.  I think modifying the `cvs' client to do such a
substitution would be a pain, but maybe this is another thing that vc.el
could easily do.

[Also note that this field could be used in other non-arch-related cases,
when for some reason one person checks in a change for another]

It looks to me like the best solution is simply to hack vc.el a bit as
previously described.

Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument!

reply via email to

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