Re: Multi-headed branches (hydra? :)) for basic patch calculus

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/2/06, Sam Vilain <sam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If the plumbing or a porcelain could be smart enough to automatically
> create hydra when patches are not dependent, then many of the benefits
> of patch calculus might come for free, without having to create these
> complicated sounding entities manually.

I'm not too excited about the benefits of patch calculus -- it seems
to break  many general usage scenarios(*) and I haven't seen many
examples of those benefits that aren't a bit contrived.

* - For instance: the common practice of having a patch series where
you create a new function and later add calls to it breaks quite
seriously under patch calculus.

Are there common usage scenarios where patch calculus helps more than
it hurts? Preferrably without involving manual recording of
dependencies or full language parsers that guess them.

cheers,


m
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]