Re: VCS comparison table

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

 



Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 02:48:52PM -0700 I heard the voice of
>> Carl Worth, and lo! it spake thus:
>> 
>>> (since pull seems the only way to synch up without infinite new
>>> merge commits being added back and forth).
>> 
>> The infinite-merge-commits case doesn't happen in bzr-land because we
>> generally don't merge other branches except when the branch owner says
>> "Hey, I've got something for you to merge".  If you were to setup a
>> script to merge two branches back and forth until they were 'equal',
>> yes, it'd churn away until you filled up your disk with the N bytes of
>> metadata every new revision uses up.
> 
> This is new to me. At work, we merge our toy repositories back and forth 
> between devs only. There is no central repo at all. Does this mean that 
> each merge would add one extra commit per time the one I'm merging with 
> has merged with me?

>From what I understand, "bzr merge" will create one extra commit to
preserve the "first parent is my branch" feature. "bzr pull" will do
fast-forward if your DAG is proper subset of pulled branch/repository
DAG, but at the cost that it would change your revno to revision mapping
to those of the pulled repository.

That's a consequence of preserving branch as "my work" i.e. as path
through "branch DAG" in the DAG using first parent as special, instead
of saving it outside DAG.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
-
To unsubscribe from this list: 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]