[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
BK-like functionality (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparis
BK-like functionality (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question)
Thu, 11 Mar 2004 10:04:50 -0800 (PST)
> From: Charles Duffy <address@hidden>
> On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 07:11, Neal D. Becker wrote:
> > I was reading subversion doc, and one thing really caught my attention.
> > says that svn doesn't keep track of which patches are already applied,
> > 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.
> This is correct. History-sensitive merging, one of the features Arch has
> had for quite some time, cannot be added to SVN until they modify their
> design to have such support. (Based on my understanding, this would be a
> quite massive design change required).
As I've recently mentioned on the Subversion dev list --
One idea is to work out how to store your personal arch project trees
in a Subversion archive. The intention of the idea is that
minute-to-minute, you can have a CVS-like experience but then, when
you want to coordinate with others, you have arch.
Now, to be sure -- for some of us this an absurdity. The idea of
running a Subversion archive is not attractive. This combination
idea is horribly bloated and so forth.
But it could give a system that feels a lot more like BK's "commits
combined to make changesets" and, in that regard, be an interesting
area for experimentation and exploration.
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, 2004/03/10