[pkg-horde] Please adopt/hijack my package

Roberto C. Sanchez roberto at familiasanchez.net
Mon Jul 10 20:32:44 UTC 2006

Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>>In my opinion, Subversion's cardinal sin in its branch handling is its
>>poor merge handling, roughly equal to CVS's. By that I mainly mean
>>that it does not keep track of which change (patch) is applied to
>>which branch. This means that if you have a branch A branching from B,
>>about 100 changes have been made in A since branching point, but about
>>50 of those have been merged back into B, to do a complete merge (all
>>changes in A to B) with subversion you must list the 50 other changes
>>(if some of them are in a sequence, they can be grouped together), or
>>risk spurious conflicts. If the VCS you use keeps track of which 50
>>changes are already applied (like tla), then you just say "merge all"
>>(in tla you would use "tla replay A" in a working tree of B) and the
>>VCS applies those 50 changes, no more, no less.
>>In simpler cases (those where "tla star-merge" works, roughly: you do
>>only total merges between directly related branches), the difference
>>is less dramatic, but still real: With subversion, you more or less
>>have to keep track of where the last merge point was with a tag, or in
>>the commit log, or externally and then give that information back to
>>svn on its command line on the next merge. tla (and the other
>>"sensible" VCSs) keep track of this for you, or _compute_ that
>>information when needed.
>>for the official SVN documentation on that simpler case. Notice how
>>many things you have to do manually!
> I see.  Since I do not use branching all that often, much less with
> repeated merges, I did not realize that was a strength on the part of
> Arch.  By the way, that is probably the most concise explanation of a
> killer feature I have seen.  My preference for Subversion has to do with
> my familiarity with it.  If we could get a very detailed HOWTO online,
> starting with the one that is already online on how to work with the
> Horde packages in Arch, I would be willing to give it another shot.  The
> problem I have with the current HOWTO is that it is very sparse, I had
> to use baz instead of tla (based on the recommendation of some people in
> #debian-devel) and I don't understand *why* the steps are taken.

I forgot to add that while the branching/merging may be a very nice
feature, I don't think it is critical for what we do as Horde package
maintainers.  Maybe for upstream development, where you develop two
trees in parallel, but not for simple package maintenance.


Roberto C. Sanchez
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-horde-hackers/attachments/20060710/201e2536/signature.pgp

More information about the pkg-horde-hackers mailing list