[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix] |
Date: |
Fri, 2 Apr 2004 10:26:31 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> > Someone mentioned the interesting case of a CVS archive that cscvs
> > calculates at 11,000 revisions. Aside from needed to tweak cscvs for
> > this purpose or build some new scripts around it -- is there any
> > reason to not want to split that into successive versions? It's
> Well, the fact that a CVS archive with the equivalent of 11K revisions is
> very usable without the need for any manual tuning or tweaking makes me
> think that Arch should be able to do that as well.
> After all, we want to be better than CVS rather than worse, right?
No, that's The Other Guys. We want to make the hands-down-best
revision control system. Not quite the same thing.
A total history containing 11K revisions is no sweat for arch. A
total history containing 100K revisions is no sweat. Putting all
those revisions in a single arch version? You're moving into the area
of using arch poorly.
> >From the user's point of view, there might not be any reason (other than
> performance limitation of tla) to split things into several versions.
I pretty much disagree although it gets into subjective fuzzy stuff.
11k revisions in a year comes out to a bit more than one per hour, 24
hours a day, 365.25 days. No development process that is doing that
in a single arch version is doing anything useful. (A process doing
that across a few (coallescing) branches, on the other hand, is
entirely realistic.)
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Dustin Sallings, 2004/04/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Miles Bader, 2004/04/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Aaron Bentley, 2004/04/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Aaron Bentley, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Aaron Bentley, 2004/04/02
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Stefan Monnier, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix],
Tom Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme, Neil Stevens, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme, Tom Lord, 2004/04/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Dustin Sallings, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Stefan Monnier, 2004/04/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Stefan Monnier, 2004/04/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/04
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Aaron Bentley, 2004/04/04
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Working out a branching scheme [was: tag --seal --fix], Tom Lord, 2004/04/04