NetBSD-Users archive

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

Re: Alternative DVCS to git: hg?



On 2019-04-17 10:02, Andreas Krey wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:10:28 +0000, Johnny Billquist wrote:
...
Are you saying that subversion would interleave two commits? Commits in
subversion are supposed to be atomic. And each commit gets a
monotonically increasing commit number. Which also gives you in which
order the commits happened.
Correct, but subversion does not guarantee that the commit you make
is actually made on the revision in your sandbox. I can add an
'#include <yours.h>', and all tests work locally, while you
commit the removal of yours.h. I still can commit my change,
resulting in a broken revision without any indication - or way
to avoid that.
But that is where I think this is correct. I can just as well also make 
a change that depends on a local file that is not even in the 
repository, and it will work fine for me, but it will fail for anyone 
else who checks things out.
As long as I'm making changes that don't conflict with other changes, 
the VCS is fine. What you seem to be asking for is that the VCS should 
have a semantic understanding of a commit, and notice if the 
code/content make sense after a commit. Or what am I missing?
CVS works the same way here.

(That 'svn log' won't even show my own commit afterwards
(or yours before) is another one of svn's many idiosyncrasies.)
I'm not following again. If I make a commit, I would assume it shows up 
afterwards if I check the log for the file. Are you saying it won't?
  Johnny

--
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index