Re: [Gnu-arch-users] NEW: --forward options (alternative to --skip-present)

[Bruce Stephens]

Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, 2003-09-21 at 07:44, Tom Lord wrote:
>> Another new option:  --forward (aka -N) to various merging commands.
>> 
>> As with `patch(1)', --forward means "ignore hunks that appear to
>> already have been applied".
>> 
>> Thus, this is a (superior, I think) alternative to --skip-present.
>
> I can certainly see it being an alternative, but as it's underpinnings
> are fundamentally different, I'm sure it's inferior.
>
> Simple case:
> How will it handle double-application of a patch into a tree where
> function names used in the patch have changed?
>
> (Not that I object to it's presence, the more power in the tools, the
> better, just it the characterisation that it's superior, when it
> -cannot- handle the scenarios skip-present was designed for....)

I agree.  It seems a useful thing to have, but arch is supposed to
keep history, so it can avoid having to do this kind of textual
guessing.  --forward is surely equivalent to what CVS does in this
kind of situation, and is presumably something that subversion does,
too.  arch is supposed to be able to do better.

Or am I misunderstanding what's going on?  (Which is quite possible.
It's after 1am.)