Re: Kernel SCM: When does CVS fall down where it REALLY matters?

[Kurt Roeckx <Q@ping.be>]

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 12:17:07PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> 
> Cort Dougan wrote:
> 
> > Only doing a given merge once is great.  That's a big time-saver over the
> > long term.
> 
> Could someone explain me, how this "merge once" works? How is this
> different from cvs? I mean, cvs is capable of doing merges, if new
> changes are not at the same position.

The way I currently work is I do a cvs diff, store it in a file,
and reverse apply it to my cvs tree, so I have a clean tree
again.  You do this with several things you're working on.

Then someone changes something, so you do a cvs update, you apply
the patches, deal with conflicts if any, and make a new patch of it.

What I would like to see, and think that they mean is, I tag
those change as a "patch" in the tree, probably localy, and I
just do a cvs update, and if there are no conflicts, I'm done.

If you only have 1 thing you're working on (per tree), cvs update
should work, but I don't want to copy the tree several times.


Kurt