Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin | Date | Fri, 01 Feb 2002 12:11:30 +0100 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
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/
| |