BK-like functionality (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question)

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Charles Duffy <address@hidden>

    > On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 07:11, Neal D. Becker wrote:
    > > I was reading subversion doc, and one thing really caught my attention. 
 It
    > > says that svn doesn't keep track of which patches are already applied, 
and
    > > applying a patch more than once would cause problems.

    > > I believe arch doesn't suffer from this defect?  Is this correct?  To my
    > > thinking, that's pretty significant.

    > This is correct. History-sensitive merging, one of the features Arch has
    > had for quite some time, cannot be added to SVN until they modify their
    > design to have such support. (Based on my understanding, this would be a
    > quite massive design change required).

As I've recently mentioned on the Subversion dev list --

One idea is to work out how to store your personal arch project trees
in a Subversion archive.   The intention of the idea is that
minute-to-minute, you can have a CVS-like experience but then, when
you want to coordinate with others, you have arch.

Now, to be sure -- for some of us this an absurdity.   The idea of
running a Subversion archive is not attractive.   This combination
idea is horribly bloated and so forth.

But it could give a system that feels a lot more like BK's "commits
combined to make changesets" and, in that regard, be an interesting
area for experimentation and exploration.

-t