[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question
From: |
Jan Hudec |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Mar 2004 10:19:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i |
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 08:11:06 -0500, Neal D. Becker wrote:
> 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.
Yes. Arch can do a "star-merge" operation, that looks for a "most recent
common ancestor" -- a point of last merge -- and apply diff from that,
which has. minimum conflicts possible.
Subversion authors chose a different approach to revision control and
don't seem to consider this important.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 'Bulb' Hudec
<address@hidden>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question, David Brown, 2004/03/10
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch/subversion comparison question, Miles Bader, 2004/03/10
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question, Rob Weir, 2004/03/10
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question,
Jan Hudec <=
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question, Adrian Irving-Beer, 2004/03/10
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question, Florian Weimer, 2004/03/15