Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 16 Mar 2002 12:51:13 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: Problems using new Linux-2.4 bitkeeper repository. |
| |
Larry McVoy wrote:
>>I think a fair question would be, is this scenario going to occur often? >> I don't know. But I'll bet you -will- see it come up again in kernel >>development. Why? We are exercising the distributed nature of the >>BitKeeper system. The system currently punishes Joe in Alaska and >>Mikhail in Russia if they independently apply the same GNU patch, and >>then later on wind up attempting to converge trees. >> > >Indeed. So speak in file systems, because a BK package is basically a file >system, with multiple distributed instances, all of which may be out of >sync. The problems show up when the same patch is applied N times and >then comes together. The inodes collide. Right now, you think that's >the problem, and want BK to fix it. We can fix that. But that's not >the real problem. The real problem is N sets of diffs being applied >and then merged. The revision history ends up with the data inserted N >times. > >I'm not sure what to do about it. I can handle the duplicate inode case >more gracefully but it's a heavy duty rewack. >
Hence my suggestion for a short term solution that's immediately useful -- allowing some way to answer "local changes take precedence 100% of the time" or "remote changes ..." with a single command. That was my hack solution that I thought would people might find useful when stuck with the duplicate-patch situation.
In the command line merge tool, when merging a file-create, "rla" would cause the current file conflict, and all future file-create conflicts, to be "won" by the remote side -- essentially creating the effect of typing "rl" 300 times. Apply similar logic to the file-rename merge case. I think the merge command I used in 100% of the cases, during that merge, was 'r'.
If you are stuck with the duplicate patch case, as happened here, I just want to see the pain eased a bit :) IMO you can put off the hard problem if you make the UI a bit better.
Jeff
- 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/
| |