On Aug 5, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Reini Urban wrote:
2008/8/5 Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So these branch commands actually create branches on the svn
repository that's doing the hosting, so they're defacto shared with
the community in the obvious location? (presuming you're online and
pushing changes back?)
That seems to be the best of both worlds, presuming it handles the
merging better/faster/cleaner than 'svn merge' does.
But this is only the best for committers.
For non-committers who would have to wait longer time to get their
patches applied
it would be better to use a git branch and merge it more often to get
in the upstream updates.
Like my bigger patches, which are often heavily outdated by other
changes when they are applied.
Howso? An svk local branch can easily pull from an upstream branch
repeatedly over time and can "push" changes to a patch file suitable
for application upstream.
(I'm _really_ not trying to start a VCS flamewar here and would be
perfectly happy to continue this in private mail)
-j
--
Reini Urban
http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/
