[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch
From: |
Andrea Arcangeli |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch |
Date: |
Wed, 1 Oct 2003 00:58:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 10:37:15PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Robert Anderson wrote:
>
> > > Personally I do see some of Andrea points. I'm using explicit tagging
> > > because, like Andrea, I do want to commit strictly.
> >
> > What is the source of this canard? What does "strict commits" have to
> > do with explicit tagging? Please explain your thought process.
>
> Ok, I will ;) I come from a school where we didn't like things (files
> included in a commit) magically happen. I do fairly often use-and-trash C
> (or Perl or whatever) test source files that are used to test something
> and that I do not want to be included in my commits. I do not care of
> doing {add, delete, move}-tag to include only things that I want to be
> included. It is not absolutely my plan to force everyone to share this
> methodology, like at the same time you should recognize that people are
> used to do things in different ways.
Exactly.
And it is obvious to me, if you want to do add/delete/move-tag
explicitly by hand as a feature (not as an annoyance), then taglines
only would provide disavantages.
If taglines would still have a value over explicit, it would simply mean
that the explicit method isn't implemented as powerful as it should be,
and that the gap would need to be filled.
Andrea - If you prefer relying on open source software, check these links:
rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.[45]/
http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Davide Libenzi, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, David Brown, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Davide Libenzi, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Samium Gromoff, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Davide Libenzi, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch,
Andrea Arcangeli <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/30
- [Gnu-arch-users] named patches, patch order, patch queue manager (was: the infinite thread), Tom Lord, 2003/09/30
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: named patches, patch order, patch queue manager (was: the infinite thread), Davide Libenzi, 2003/09/30
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/28
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/28
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Ethan Benson, 2003/09/28
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Paul Hedderly, 2003/09/28
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, Tom Lord, 2003/09/28
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch, David Brown, 2003/09/28