[Top][All Lists]

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

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Future of GNU Arch, bazaar and bazaar-ng ... ?

From: martin f krafft
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Future of GNU Arch, bazaar and bazaar-ng ... ?
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:22:05 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

also sprach John A Meinel <address@hidden> [2005.08.23.1211 +0200]:
> I still feel like StGIT is barking up the wrong tree. You have
> a tool which handles repeated modifications and merging, and then
> you put another one on top of it that does exactly the same thing,
> only throwing out history. So why not just give a "throw out
> history" option, and then not have to worry about multiple pieces
> repeating themselves.

Absolutely. But there remains something in me saying that floating
patch management (e.g. like quilt, but better) is also a really nice
option to have. Obviously it can be implemented with branches, but
it's much easier to do it on top.

There's a conceptual difference between undoing a patch that has
been merged into a branch, and simply removing a patch from the set
of floating patches.

> But then again, I use my source control to move back and forth
> between about 5 different machines. So I'm used to committing
> things in a broken state, just because I'm going somewhere else
> and I want to keep working on it there.


FWIW, this is one of the best threads I've been following for a long
time. Thanks!

martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; address@hidden
invalid/expired pgp (sub)keys? use as keyserver!
spamtraps: address@hidden
people with narrow minds usually have broad tongues.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)

reply via email to

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