[Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch/subversion comparison question

[Miles Bader]

"Neal D. Becker" <address@hidden> writes:
> I was reading subversion doc, and one thing really caught my attention.  It
> says that svn doesn't keep track of which patches are already applied, and
> applying a patch more than once would cause problems.
> 
> I believe arch doesn't suffer from this defect?  Is this correct?  To my
> thinking, that's pretty significant.

It sort of depends on what you mean by `patches' and `applied'... :-)

Arch does keep track of all changesets that are present, including
those that come from merges; I presume this is what you meant.

This doesn't _automatically_ solve the problem of duplicate application
-- it depends on the how you decide which changesets you're going to
apply, and in arch there are many valid ways to do this, many of which
are useful for certain development styles -- however, arch does store
enough information and provide tools that are very useful for this.

For the common `star-merge' style, indeed arch won't duplicate patches.

-Miles
-- 
We have met the enemy, and he is us.  -- Pogo