Bruce Momjian wrote: > Gregory Stark wrote: > > You're still merging patches and reviewing patches by hand, without any of > > the > > tools to, for example, view incremental changes in the branch, view the logs > > of the branch, merge the branch into the code automatically taking into > > account the known common ancestor. Instead of receiving a 20k patch without > > any tools to work with it you would be given a branch name and be able to > > view > > and merge it into the main branch using the tools. > > I don't see this as a win. I understand the ability to see the patch as > separate revisions by the user, but for patch application, we really > need to see the diff -c of the entire patch.
The fact that you're still thinking in "patch application" means you're still stuck in the CVS worldview. To "apply a patch" in a distributed SCM(*) really means to merge a branch into the main development branch. Of course, you can still see the entire "diff -c" if you want. (*) I'm not sure if this is true of all distributed SCMs, or just a property of Monotone. Really it's the only one I follow more-or-less closely. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
