Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Jul 2002 10:16:15 +0200 | From | Lars Marowsky-Bree <> | Subject | Re: using bitkeeper to backport subsystems? |
| |
On 2002-07-22T15:44:43, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> said:
> > 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.
So, another option would be to have the developer define explicit dependencies for his changesets, but I fear that might prove to cumbersome, too.
Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>
-- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister
- 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/
| |