Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:23:29 -0600
From: "Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>
To: John Meinel <john@arbash-meinel.com>
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Removing the last changeset(s) from the archive
Message-ID: <20041114152329.C29200@mofo.meme.com>
References: <20041114111431.E15533@mofo.meme.com>
	<4197AAA5.7080501@panoramicfeedback.com>
	<20041114131902.Q15533@mofo.meme.com>
	<1100459623.15201.46.camel@localhost>
	<20041114134530.A23046@mofo.meme.com>
	<4197BF40.1010300@arbash-meinel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4197BF40.1010300@arbash-meinel.com>;
	from john@arbash-meinel.com on Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 14:25:36 -0600
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, Charles Duffy <cduffy@spamcop.net>
Precedence: list
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2309
Lines: 52

On 2004.11.14 14:25 John Meinel wrote:

> I think you've just described the difference between a dev tree, and 
> a stable tree.

> But if you really want "this tree is always good", you probably want 
> something more like a stable branch, rather than trying to do that 
> with your dev branch.

When I'm developing I'm partly using revision control to keep track
of what I'm working on.  I just don't want it to get in the way,
so, especially while I'm learning arch I don't want to have to
stop and figure out how to undo a commit mistake.  But
that's niether here nor there because the'll always be
mistakes.  In terms of using revision control as a
brain extension, I'd like to be able to try things
out in my development branch with the freedom allowed
when I always know I can undo, so I want the commits
in the archive to be "clean" cuts of what I think I've
done.  As I often am doing more than one thing at a time
this means committing with care, to ensure that
'one thing' gets committed at a time.

Certainly
there's always a fixup when the rule is "archive
changes are permanent", but there's more brainwork
when recovering from a commit mistake, and more brain
work should one of my current ideas dead-end and
I have to make sense of what to revert.  (I'm not
talking here of un-committing a recent change
but of backing out something old and then commiting
that revert to the tree.)  A quick 'undo-commit'
after making a commit mistake would be handy,
but not essential.

Anybody sharing an archive would have to live
without 'undo-commit', given that arch has
no network protocol.  In some sense sharing
can be construed as the difference between a
stable and a deveopment branch.  Because many
will have to live without 'undo-commit' I wouldn't
think it worth doing unless it can be done easily and
cleanly.

Absent an undo-commit, a 'standardized' interface
for replay -reverse;sync-tree;commit would reduce the
"Oh no!" factor of making a commit mistake.

Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                  -- Robert A. Heinlein


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/