On Thursday 25 September 2008 23:22:51 wrote Marcus Rueckert:
On 2008-09-25 23:14:55 +0200, Susanne Oberhauser wrote:
1. IMHO branch merge handling with svn is quite painfull as you need to know yourself what you branched of and what you've already merged in, at least last time I tried.
svn log --stop-on-copy
1.5 got merge tracking
but this is not a system to keep a branch automatically up2date and just storing your changes like the source links does. There is also no functionality for handling all the functionality like topadd or automatic changelog handling like planned.
Maybe a system that's designed with recieving and merging in patches, like git, might do a better job here.
So I believe we are doing more and other things than svn.
our merge handling is ... in friendly words: less than optimal.
the merge handling is okay, the conflict handling is missing ;) The conflict handling is definitive something we need, and when we can take it if from something else, it would be great. But it is pointless to discuss the current source handling, when all other solutions do not even support the stuff where we have detail problems. We would only loose and not gain anything, just lots of additonal work to add lots of functionality on top of it what will cause for sure new problems. Better fix the missing 1% instead of rewriting the other 99% ;) bye adrian -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org