| 1 |
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Jonas Bernoulli <jonas@×××××××.li> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> For various reasons "etc-under-version-control" loses much of the |
| 4 |
> power and/or ease of use that comes with the underlying vcs. Much of |
| 5 |
> this being due to the fact that the files being kept in the repository |
| 6 |
> are totally unrelated. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> The solution to this obviously is to maintain a separate branch for |
| 9 |
> each package. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I have to ask, what's the 'obviousness' here? I don't see why each |
| 12 |
package should have it's own branch, if they are not related, A they |
| 13 |
should have their own repo, B, they should be in the same branch. |
| 14 |
their relation is relative as they are all configs for a system. I'm a |
| 15 |
big git user so I'm trying to understand conceptually what you're on |
| 16 |
about. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Caleb Cushing |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com |
Archives