Re: isn't variance adjusted patching horribly dangerous?

Philip Martin wrote:
>
> Fixing the same bug in two different ways is a mistake, it should be
> fixed in one place and merged to the other. Yes, mistakes will
> sometimes happen, but at other times adjacent changes like those above
> will not be a conflict.

This is the process flaw, you can't control it. From common sense, they /are/ a conflict.

>
> I disagree, this is not the wrong result--from a version control point
> of view the changes have been combined perfectly.
>

No matter what the theory is behind this, Tom's example definitely looks right to me, I would refrain from using the system that
would throw the context away. Practical experience shows that at least three lines guaranteed by `diff -u' are necessary.
Consider also the fact that Mozilla developers usually demand 30 (!) lines context on the patches.

Thanks!

Sergey.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Apr 10 00:37:44 2003