[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Preserving annotations across merges?

From: Arthur Barrett
Subject: RE: Preserving annotations across merges?
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:08:44 +1000


> I'm not sure but I think this information is not kept 
> in Subversion either. Maybe the future merge tracking 
> will provide enough information to annotate source properly.

Merge tracking is already in CVSNT (linux/unix/windows LGPL/free, just like 
CVS) of course (along with every other subversion "feature" plus the ones they 
haven't even realised they need yet, like failsafe auditing).

The original post is raising an interesting "problem".  CVSNT has "change sets" 
(bug numbers) that can identify each change (in the same way as author does) as 
well as commit id's (like subversion has) that identify each commit.  
Physically in the RCS file they occupy the same "space" as the author.

I've thought for a while that commit id's and changesets/bugids should display 
in the annotate output - but the format is rather fixed so it's a little 
difficult.  But of course it would be possible to substitute the author column 
for the bugid/changeset/jobid (or the commitid).

Then if you commit bug 123 on branch B and merge it to branch A using bug id 
123 and then commit it to branch A as bug 123 (potentially as a different user) 
then you still wont be able to see that the change was by the same author, but 
you will be able to "see" that they are for the same bug/change/job and then 
the defect tracking system/bugzilla/whatever will show you who authored it, who 
tested, who merged etc etc.

If this change would be valuable - please start a thread on the support.cvsnt 
newsgroup on and if there is enough interest I can vote for it 
at our team meetings too.  Of course you'd have to "upgrade" to CVSNT from CVS, 
but that's a seemless "in place" operation.


Arthur Barrett

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]