On Aug 28, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_red-
bean.com> wrote:
> Comment from the peanut gallery:
>
> Git has apparently done a fantastic job of 'extending' the standard
> diff/patch format with backward-compatible metadata that modern
> version control systems need. Mercurial has essentially standardized
> around this format as well. (Everyone in the hg world runs 'hg diff
> --git' semi-automatically now, and the --git option may soon become
> the default.) I hear rumors that bzr is now supporting it too
> (kfogel?).
>
> A long, long time ago we had a mailing list in which different SCM
> people came together to discuss a "universal format for representing
> changesets". The list ended up being a failure, but N years later it
> seems like at least the distributed version control world *has*
> finally standardized on a common format. If we want subversion to
> remain relevant/useful/interoperable for the future, we should
> probably strongly consider rewriting this whole feature to use the new
> defacto standard.
>
> This is not to trivialize all the work that went in already; but in
> hindsight, it may not be the best overall product strategy. And if
> we're busy questioning whether the existing code is even maintainable,
> all the more reason to consider a fresh start on this problem.
>
+1
I was going to suggest the same thing for the same reasons. I tried
to find documentation and details on this format but couldn't. Which
is why I did not comment.
ISTR glasser suggested this recently too.
Good thing is that all the unidiff work done recently would be very
relevant for this too.
Mark
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2388430
Received on 2009-08-29 03:05:08 CEST