Re: Sarge TODO items
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 09:38:58PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 09:42:16PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 02:12:49PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > > > Now, if arch had a bitkeeper gateway ...
> > >
> > > What would that do?
> >
> > Well, not really be usefull in the current plan, which is to hold only
> > the debian part, but if there was a bitekeeper gateway, we could hold
> > the whole kernel tree in it, and efficiently interact with the bitkeeper
> > archive of upstream.
>
> What's your defintion of efficient interaction? If we want a fork with
> our patches kept forever just pulling in something from bitkeeper could
> make life a little easier because it's very good as merging. But as
> soon as you look at it from a two-way merging perspective any SCM will
> suck badly if we start storing the whole tree.
Well, the idea is to keep the patches in two forms, one as patch files,
and the second in an unpacked copy of the full tree, which is used as a
working dir and to be able to easily merge stuff from there to the
upstream ones. But then, i assume you use bitkeeper itself to do this
second step.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: