[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:46:32 -0800 (PST)

    > From: Jan Hudec <address@hidden>

    > 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.

It deepnds on where in the timeline you're looking at them.
History-sensitive merging was one of the initial goals.

The other thing they've messed up is merging across branches where
renames are present in one branch but not the other.   And in that
area, yes, the attitude seems to be "Bah....that's just an uncommon
case that you can work around by hand."

I regard the renaming issue as an example of feedback between tools
and decisions.   I know it works well in arch so I rename stuff far
more frequently than I would if arch couldn't hack it.


reply via email to

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