[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] .listing files

From: Zenaan Harkness
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] .listing files
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 07:02:23 +1000

On Thu, 2004-09-23 at 06:44, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > I've raised this before in a not so direct way:
> > 
> > In Aegis, when you "integrate", a 'lock' is taken when the "aeib" (aegis
> > integrate begin) command is run (file "=lock" or whatever), to serialize
> > commits.
> > 
> > Is it possible to 'easily' add such functionality to arch?
> > 
> > Or is it better to somehow layer something on top of arch?
> In Arch, you can acquire a lock for any version you have commit access 
> to, with the lock-revision command.
> > This parallel committing is kinda funky, but seems unnecessary in the
> > general case (think bitkeeper, linux kernel, 10MB patches per month, all
> > serialized, yadda yadda).
> What makes you say that Linux development is serialized?  People work on 
> their individual trees, occasionally pulling in changes from the Linus 
> tree.  They don't need a lock on the Linus tree to commit.

Commits to any _individual tree_ are serialized (unless I'm grossly

> > Really, is anything gained by allowing these parallel commits other than
> > bragging rights? (OK, flame me down on that one - but I really do want
> > to know, so please do include an explanation with your flame :)
> It's freedom.  The freedom to fork at any time.

This sounds like an argument for tla vs bitkeeper, which is not what I
was saying in the slightest. Unless the argument is that the time period
during which a commit is occurring would be too onerous to lock "get"s
out of - I'd find that hard to believe though - and if it really were a
problem, of course, the existing behaviour is there.

>   The freedom to merge at any time.


>   The freedom to cooperate, or use centralized development, or 
> write your own project that no one else will ever see.


I think you just misunderstood my question.

Sorry 'bout that.


reply via email to

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