Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-grimoire - Re: [SM-Grimoire] Smaller devel grimoire

sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dufflebunk" <dufflebunk AT go-nix.ca>
  • To: "Tony Smith" <tony AT smee.org>, "Hamish Greig" <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>, "Grimoire" <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Smaller devel grimoire
  • Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:50:51 -0400

I'm not a guru, so my opinion in this matter doesn't matter. I will;
however, point out that Tony is the /most/ experienced user of p4 here by
far. His opinion on the problems should be very carefuly considered. I
thought that a minimal devel would be nice too, until these points were
brought up, now I'm not so sure.

--------- Original Message --------
From: Tony Smith <tony AT smee.org>

> On Wednesday 17 September 2003 3:16 pm, Hamish Greig wrote:
> &gt; On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:29, Tony Smith wrote:
> &gt; &gt; Nice idea, but it's going to make things very difficult to
manage...
> &gt; &gt;
> &gt; &gt; What happens when the devel version is integrated into test? Are
you
> &gt; &gt; proposing to delete it from devel? If so you're about to cause a
lot of
> &gt; &gt; hassle for the test/stable maintainers.
> &gt;
> &gt; Two quick questions Tony
> &gt; 1) if a spell is added in devel, worked on, then /integrated/ to
test, then
> &gt; the devel version is deleted won't the test version keep all the
previous
> &gt; revision history ?
>
> Yes, but the next time you try to edit that spell in devel you have to add
it
> again and then when you come to integrate that change into test, Perforce
> (rightly) sees it as an entirely new file that just happens to have the
same
> name as an old one and doesn't consider any previous integration history
> between the two files. Hello baseless merge...
>
> &gt; 2) For spells already in test that we have copied into devel to
rewrite/
> &gt; whatever can't we just use p4 edit and then copy the files back into
test
> &gt; when we are ready ? the files get updated to the newer version but
keep all
> &gt; previous revision history (from test) ? Or not ? The history from
the
> &gt; rewrite is of little concern to me as i would like to see more ###
> &gt; commenting in the spells and more descriptive HISTORY entries.
> &gt; If these two points are good then devel would truly be just a
&quot;branch&quot; of
> &gt; test for work in progress ( like someone mentioned last week)

> &gt; maybe a quick third point :)
>
> Basically you can't have it both ways. Either devel is a branch of test
and is
> maintained in a way that is compatible with the maintenance of test, or
devel
> is an entirely separate codeline. If you treat devel/test as separate
> unrelatated codelines, then yes, you can &quot;p4 edit&quot; and copy
files across to
> propagate changes, but you're just making a process that was automatic
> manual. The onus is now on you to track what has been copied over and what
> hasn't. In that case, I wish you luck - you'll need it.
>
> If &quot;p4 sync&quot; is taking too long, then first make sure you're
using the
> &quot;compress&quot; client option (run &quot;p4 client&quot;). Many
people are not using that
> and it makes a big difference.
>
> &gt; If cvs syncing will trample all over our revision history anyway, why
go
> &gt; out of our way to save it just to lose it later ?
>
> What makes you think a CVS sync will do that? I'm not a fan of trashing
> history, so I would do my best to avoid it in a sync.
>
> Tony




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page