Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: removal of packet functions

[Thomas Keller]

Am 10.08.10 17:20, schrieb John Bailey:
> On 08/10/2010 11:01 AM, Patrick Georgi wrote:
>> What currently works is to manually collect relevant packets (revisions,
>> files, certs) for explicitely given revs - that could be automated some
>> more, but I think the consensus is to use patches instead (even if they
>> lose some information) - they're much more approachable for humans.
> 
> It would be nice to have a way to send (or possibly even generate for manual
> sending) a series of patches in a manner similar to what git and hg allow.

Could you please be a bit more specific how you'd imagine this should
work out / look like? Personally I haven't dealt much with the patch
possibilities in neither hg nor git, so it would be interesting to know
what you actually need.

Thanks,
Thomas.

-- 
GPG-Key 0x160D1092 | address@hidden | http://thomaskeller.biz
Please note that according to the EU law on data retention, information
on every electronic information exchange might be retained for a period
of six months or longer: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/?lang=en

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature