lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.070 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site