Re: BK-like functionality (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question)

[Robin Green]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 10:04:50AM -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
> As I've recently mentioned on the Subversion dev list --
> 
> One idea is to work out how to store your personal arch project trees
> in a Subversion archive.   The intention of the idea is that
> minute-to-minute, you can have a CVS-like experience but then, when
> you want to coordinate with others, you have arch.
> 
> Now, to be sure -- for some of us this an absurdity.   The idea of
> running a Subversion archive is not attractive.   This combination
> idea is horribly bloated and so forth.

Yes.

> But it could give a system that feels a lot more like BK's "commits
> combined to make changesets" and, in that regard, be an interesting
> area for experimentation and exploration.

I would like to do something like that, but just with arch. The reason
being, so that I can commit very frequently while I make every half-arsed
change I can think of to figure out a problem - but I won't have to
export those embarrassing half-arsed changes to the whole world.
(And the whole world won't have to rummage through them, either.)

What I plan to do is have a private archive for nano-changes, then when I
have a minor or major change ready, do a diff on the private archive and
pipe that to a patch on the "archive for publication" (AfP, i.e. my main
archive, which will have a public mirror). Then commit on the AfP, and make
a new branch on the private archive tagged off where I've just committed to.

(It means a lot of branches on the private archive, but then that just
means I'd use archive cycling more on the private archive.)

Unless there is an easier / more sensible way?

-- 
Robin

pgpdBk_QzMdsd.pgp
Description: PGP signature