Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Changes consulting project tree to construct revision

[Miles Bader]

On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 09:16:16AM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> tla changes acts somewhat oddly when passed a package-version.  Unlike 
> most commands, it uses the latest log in the tree to determine the 
> patchlevel.  This is documented behaviour, I just don't see much value 
> in it.

Besides being nicely self-consistent, I think it's basically the `right
thing', and quite useful:

  tla changes VERSION

currently provides you with the changes made in the project tree subsequent
to the last time the project tree was forked/merged from VERSION.

If you used the _archive_ to decide the revision of VERSION to use, then it
would provide you that intermingled with the _reverse_ of other random
changes done to VERSION since you last forked/merged from it.

Since the name of the command is `changes', it makes quite a bit of sense
that it should you only the _changes_ you've made since VERSION, not those
plus other random stuff.

> Other commands (like get, update) use the archive, not the tree to
> determine the patchlevel, when given a package-version.

`update' calculates _two_ revisions in VERSION: it undoes the local changes
since VERSION -- and that operation uses the tree logs to decide the
revision, just like changes -- and then and then applies changes on VERSION
between that revision and the latest archive revision (and then of course
redoes the undone changes).  So you can't really claim update is one way or
the other, it's both (and that's its charm).

`get' is a different sort of command altogether -- one which operates without
regard to any project tree, so it obviously can't do anything useful with
tree logs.

So, in summary:  Um, no.

-Miles
-- 
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
  --Albert Einstein