Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 11:07 +0200:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name]
> >
> > I'd like to understand the topology / flow of changes: what ensures that
> > changes made directly to publish are not reverted by a subsequent
> > promotion of staging?
> >
> > FWIW, in the Apache CMS, a "publish" operation uses 'svnmucc rm publish
> > cp N staging publish', so it's an O(1) operation, but it literally overwrites any
> > changes that may have been made directly to publish/. (I'm glossing over a
> > detail but that's the gist)
>
> I think we should just use svn merge, to avoid these problems? No CMS here.
For clarity, I'm not proposing a move to the CMS; I'm simply pointing out that
the physical way by which commits port from staging to publish, or from
publish to staging, may be either 'svn merge + svn commit' or that 'svnmucc'
replace operation.
Received on 2017-10-04 13:22:01 CEST