[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Adrian Irving-Beer
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 10:42:18 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/

On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 08:11:06AM -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.

Yes and no.  There's nothing to prevent the user explicitly attempting
to apply an arbitrary replay (or for that matter, any arbitrary patch)
twice and getting copious conflicts.

That being said, the place this likely comes into play most is when you
have two (or more) branches all attempting to keep in sync with each
other by applying each other's patches.

In the latter case, tla has excellent logic to prevent spurious
conflicts.  I have had more than one instance where branch semantics
were complicated enough to start confusing *me*, but tla just merrily
went and merged everything flawlessly.

See 'tla star-merge -H'.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

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