Re: [Gnu-arch-users] recent changes in address@hidden, and star-merge and update/replay defaults

[Colin Walters]

On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 00:35, Robert Collins wrote:

> Yes, and thats the point. If you hack on feature X, it gets accepted
> upstream, and you want to reset your branch, you have three choices:
> 1) star-merge in a patch of size X.
> 2) sync-tree it, getting a patch of size X.
> 3) retag it from the upstream, getting a patch of a few K.
> 
> 3 can lead to considerable savings over the long term. And it's the same
> as 2) from a loss of local changes perspective. And you don't want local
> changes because they've just been merged.

I personally think that's a hack, but whatever.  Note that the reference
version would be exactly the same, so it doesn't make any difference
whether you use base-0 or the last continuation.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part