Re: More on "arch" (our competition)

On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:14:56AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
 
> IIRC, Bitkeeper did not have an extended diff format that was human
> readable.
>
> Personally, I would suggest that an extended diff should resemble a
> shell script closely enough that it could be applied to an exported
> tree by running it. Metadata not present in an exported tree could
> be carried along by making it look like comments to sh, and arch or
> subversion would still be able to find it.

that's a neat idea, but subversion runs on windows, and it would be
nice to not have to require something like cygwin. if our patch
format is based in /bin/sh, that sort of ties us to unix like os's.
now i realize that at the moment, due to our use of external diff and
patch tools, we do depend on cygwin when running on windows, but in
the long run, we would like to remove that dependency, and if we're
going to the trouble of creating a diff format, it would be nice if it
was one that did not further ingrain that dependency.

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                     Unix was not designed to stop you from 
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net       doing stupid things, because that would  
http://electricjellyfish.net/      stop you from doing clever things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org