Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Feb 2002 09:30:56 -0200 (BRST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin |
| |
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Horst von Brand wrote:
> 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).
If the object is to minimise confusion by not showing back-tracked changes, why not simply allow the user to mark changesets with a "visibility":
1) hidden, for stuff which shouldn't be seen by default, like backed out changes, etc.. 2) small, individual development steps to achieve a new feature 3) normal, the normal commits 4) major (tagged versions ?)
This way the user can select how detailed the overview of the versions should be.
Also, when viewing a changeset/version of a certain priority, bitkeeper could optionally "fold in" the hidden changesets between the last changeset and the one the user wants to view.
Would this be a workable scheme ?
(keeps the bitkeeper repository intact, can reduce the confusion)
regards,
Rik -- "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS" -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- 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/
| |