[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Checkpointing v1 design -- terminology

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:12:53 +0100

On 10.11.2017 14:20, Julian Foad wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> [...] To achieve such rollbacks, the user would have to first revert,
>> which involves deciding what to revert.
>> And that seems OK to me.
> The larger point is that this kind of work flow, and the difficulty of
> working with changes in overlapping subtrees, is analogous to some
> existing techniques. For example, if one tries to use two different
> branches to manage two different change-sets, and work with them both
> in one WC by switching part of the WC to one branch and another part
> to another branch, and the changes involve overlapping subdirectories,
> maybe like this...
>  svn switch "^/branches/#1" A/B
>  svn switch "^/branches/#2" A/B/F A/D
>  svn switch "^/branches/#1"       A/D/G
> ... it seems to me that more or less the same issues arise.

To be fair, I've yet to hear of a VCS that can handle this sort of
complexity and make it easy for users. Git cops out by having
all-or-nothing branches, commits, etc. But add submodules and you're in
the same leaky boat again.

-- Brane
Received on 2017-11-10 15:19:40 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.