On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 09:27:14AM +0800, Wee Yeh Tan wrote: > On 10/7/06, David Dyer-Bennet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I've never encountered branch being used that way, anywhere. It's > >used for things like developing release 2.0 while still supporting 1.5 > >and 1.6. > > > >However, especially with merge in svn it might be feasible to use a > >branch that way. What's the operation to update the branch from the > >trunk in that scenario? > > You "merge" the changes from the main trunk.
I think David meant something else. History of intermediate changes is often useless, particularly if some of those changes don't build. In ON development we've used Teamware for years, and for years we've had a policy that intermediate deltas must be collapsed. We have a script, 'wx', that can do that trivially, and good thing too, because collapsing deltas without it is a pain. (I.e., in Teamware terms, if you bringover version 1.7 of some file, check-in 1.8, then 1.9, then putback to the parent workspace you'll be creating versions 1.8 and 1.9 in the parent when noone needs to see 1.8, so what you want to do is collapse those two deltas, which then become version 1.8, and that's what you putback.) But this is a lame argument for FV! Because any good VC lets you version intermediate work without polluting the main trunk when you're done. Nico -- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
