On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 04:40:52PM -0600, Jay Freeman (saurik) wrote:
> (which is what most of this e-mail is about, how line-by-line needs
> to be kept in mind constantly when working with diff/patch).
FWIW, I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. It seems
like it would be a major pain in the ass if I have to manually convert
from unix to windows line ending when I want to edit it and then
convert it back to unix again when I want to merge it, then convert it
back to windows again when I want to resolve conflicts, then convert
it back again to unix when I want to submit (and how do commit
comments get submitted and handled?).
> However, I have a more powerful conclusion :). The merging engine
> needs to be extensible in the be-all and end-all of concurrent
> version control.
I don't think it is just the merge engine (although I think that is a
part of it) that you want, I think what you want (and what I want in
an ideal world) is a version control system that had granularity of
smaller than the file size. Mark Chu-Carroll sometimes posts on this
list, or used to, at any rate. He is heading up a project at IBM
that was called Coven and is now called Synedra/CM or something like
that. He said that they would eventually be releasing it as Open
Source, but who knows if that'll ever actually happen :). I strongly
agree with the ideas of the Coven system, however it means that the
source control system needs to know about the structure of the data in
order to create the virtual source files the system depends on. Sorry
I don't have a reference but if you look through the archives of this
list you can find posts from him with URLs to the website at IBM.
Justus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:52 2006