1 |
On 27-08-2008 10:28:57 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 06:35:57PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
3 |
> > For that reason I'd pretty much prefer to keep the CVS Header in place, |
4 |
> > unless there is a very good reason to remove it. |
5 |
> As I wrote in the other thread, my reason for asking is that it's one of |
6 |
> the things that doesn't have clear mapping in the Git world. As a side |
7 |
> benefit, getting rid of it also makes the double-commit mess go away. |
8 |
|
9 |
For who is it a mess? Not for repoman users, I suppose, and everyone |
10 |
should be using it, right? As the one who personally played with the |
11 |
code in repoman that determines whether or not the "double commit" is |
12 |
necessary, I think it's mostly a repoman internal problem. The commit |
13 |
script problems put aside. |
14 |
|
15 |
> For your use case, it should be possible to just ask Git for updates to |
16 |
> the given directory, and apply those to your own tree. |
17 |
|
18 |
Another VCS is another story. If we're switching, it would be nice if |
19 |
the notion of overlays shadowing the main tree would be taken into |
20 |
account. Especially since I don't think Prefix will "merge" any time |
21 |
soon, but we are plagued by the thing called "growth". |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
-- |
25 |
Fabian Groffen |
26 |
Gentoo on a different level |