| 1 |
Ian Stakenvicius: |
| 2 |
> Git on the other hand will update the entire |
| 3 |
> tree and there's no way around that, right? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Yeah, people have to understand that we cannot map the cvs workflow 1:1 |
| 6 |
to git. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
That's for a reason and that little inconvenience it causes is pretty |
| 9 |
minor compared to the breakage CVS allows (user syncs at a bad time and |
| 10 |
gets a broken tree, repoman gives bogus results etc.). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
There is no reason to roll back commits or do merge commits for the |
| 13 |
keywords conflict use case. So I don't see what else needs discussion |
| 14 |
here, except the proposal from ulm. |
Archives