Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree

Anton Altaparmakov
2002-04-20T18:35:08Z

At 18:58 20/04/02, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cantab.net> writes:
> > The fact that some developers use bitkeeper has no effect on other
> > developers. Well ok, it means that the bk using developers can work
> faster but
> > that is not at issue here...
>
>Faster? BK has no impact on the fundamentals of code development. Only
>on the problem of merging code. Only when the bottle neck is merge speed
>does it really come into play.

I would disagree personally. The more I play with the GUI tools provided by
bitkeeper the more interesting things i discover. For example actually
SEEING how patches fit together, being able to see what each patch did,
looking at a file and having each line annotated as to who added it and in
which patch makes it easier for me to understand how the code I am trying
to understand has evolved and why certain things are the way they are. But
that is something very personal to me, others may not find it useful...

>For Linus this is obviously a very important issue. For some of the
>rest of us it is less so.
>
>For myself I find great benefit in reviewing my own patches, and in
>having other people look at them and review them. I may be wrong
>but I do not see bitkeeper helping in that regard (except reduce
>the noise of renames).

I really like the way bk citool works because it makes my changelogs a lot
more useful as I actually see what I have changed when writing them. But
again, that is just me...

Best regards,

Anton

--
"I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.openprojects.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/