Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | 09 Mar 2003 06:34:30 -0700 |
| |
Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> writes:
> Hi, > > On Sat, 8 Mar 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > None of these are issues for broken systems like CVS or SVN, since they > > have a central repository, so there _cannot_ be multiple concurrent > > renames that have to be merged much later. > > It is possible, you only have to remember that the file foo.c doesn't have > to be called foo.c,v in the repository. SVN should be able to handle this, > it's just lacking important merging mechanisms. > This is actually a key feature I want to see in a SCM system - the ability > to keep multiple developments within the same repository. I want to pull > other source tress into a branch and compare them with other branches and > merge them into new branches.
In a distributed system everything happens on a branch.
> > Sepoarate repostitories and SCCS file formats have nothing to do with the > > real problem. Distribution is key, not the repository format. > > I agree, what I was trying to say is that the SCCS format makes a few > things more complex than they had to be.
I don't know, if the problem really changes that much. How do you pick a globally unique inode number for a file? And then how do you reconcile this when people on 2 different branches create the same file and want to merge their versions together?
So as a very rough approximation. - Distribution is the problem. - Powerful branching is the only thing that helps this - Non branch local data (labels/tags) is very difficult.
Eric - 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/
| |