Public Git repo

[Phil Longstaff]

I was thinking in general of the introduction of merge metadata to allow them to 
keep track what had been merged and allow smarter merging.

 Phil
---------
I used to be a hypochondriac AND a kleptomaniac. So I took something for it.




________________________________
From: John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us>
To: Mike Alexander <mta at umich.edu>
Cc: gnucash-devel gnucash <gnucash-devel at gnucash.org>
Sent: Mon, January 3, 2011 3:15:44 PM
Subject: Re: Public Git repo


On Jan 3, 2011, at 12:02 PM, Mike Alexander wrote:

> --On January 3, 2011 10:13:34 AM -0800 Phil Longstaff <plongstaff at rogers.com> 
>wrote:
> 
>>> Compared to SVN: topic/feature/bugfix branches. For example look at
>>> [2] and notice how each bug I’ve worked on has been in a separate
>>> Git branch. That history has been squished flat by SVN, but Git
>>> remembers the branchy development.
>> 
>> Is remembering the 'branchy development' really a requirement here?
>> SVN certainly supports feature and bugfix branches, and we've
>> certainly used it that way.  It does have a problem that you cannot
>> really merge multiple times, so you have to worry about multiple
>> merges from a branch back to trunk.
>> 
>> [Phil] Is this still true with SVN 1.5 and 1.6.  I know that
>> somewhere in there,  they improved merging and how merges were
>> recorded, so these problems might have  gone away.
> 
> Is this what is described at 
><http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn-book.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.reintegratetwice>?
>
> 
>           Mike
> 

More or less. Looks like SVN is feeling a little heat. ;-)

Regards,
John Ralls

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel