Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> said:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:29:58AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> > That sounds almost like what I was looking for, with two differences.
> >
> > (1) Implement the collapsed set so bk records that it is equivalent to
> > the individual patchsets. Only record that information in my tree.
> > I need the detailed history of what changes went into the collapsed
> > set, nobody else does.
> >
> > (2) Somebody else creates a change against the collapsed set and I pull
> > that change. bk notices that the change is again a collapsed set
> > for which I have local detail. The external change becomes a
> > branch off the last detailed patch in the collapsed set.
>
> This is certainly possible to do. However, unless you are willing to fund
> this development, we aren't going to do it. We will pick up the costs of
> making changes that you want if and only if we have commercial customers
> who want (or are likely to want) the same thing. Nothing personal, it's
> a business and we make tradeoffs like that all the time.
I wonder how your commercial customers develop code then. Either each
programmer futzes around in his/her own tree, and then creates a patch (or
some such) for everybody to see (then I don't see the point of source
control as a help to the individual developer), or everybody sees all the
backtracking going on everywhere (in which case the repository is a mostly
useless mess AFAICS).
-- Horst von Brand http://counter.li.org # 22616 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 07 2002 - 21:00:13 EST