[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: using bitkeeper to backport subsystems?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 11:29:41PM +0100, Roger Gammans wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 08:20:31AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > Possibly, once bitkeeper allowes ChangeSets to only depend on what they
> > actually need, not every previous ChangeSet in the repository. IIRC,
> > this was one of the things Linus asked for, so hopefully it will happen.
> While that would be great.
> With all due respect to Larry and the bk team, I think you'll
> find determining 'needed changesets' in this case is a _hard_ problem.

Thanks, we agree completely. It's actually an impossible problem
for a program since it requires semantic knowledge of the content
under revision control. And even then the program can get it wrong
(think about a change which shortens the depth of the stack followed by
a change that won't work with the old stack depth, now you export that
to the other tree and it breaks yet it worked in the first tree).

> Now , bk could make this a little easier by allowing changesets to
> be exported without any dependencies (ala GNU-patch export - but
> with metadata for commit messages).

That's trivial to do, we already have a 'bk export -tpatch -r<rev>' which
does the patch part. Combine that with 'bk changes -vr<rev>' and you have
what you are talking about on the sending side. On the receiving side
we have 'bk import -tpatch' and 'bk comments' which do the other half.
Larry McVoy lm at
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.064 / U:5.120 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site