Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Seeing before applying

[Jan Hudec]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 16:13:02 +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 14:52, Miles Bader wrote:
> > Colin Walters <address@hidden> writes:
> > > how about instead just making 'tla delta' with no arguments compute a
> > > delta between the current tree version and the latest archive
> > > revision?
> > 
> > Sounds reasonable to me, e.g.:
> > 
> >    tla delta       =>   tla delta . `tla missing -f | tail -1`
> 
> 
>  ==  tla changes

Partialy:

tla changes == tla changes `tla logs -f | tail -1` .

but:

tla changes `tla revisions -f | tail -1` .

is desired.

Actualy, the most useful would be:
tla changes `tla logs -f | tail -1` `tla revisions -f | tail -1`

Which is "the changes to be replayed", though even here not exactly.
Suppose you have skipped patches...

> 
> > What about `tla delta' with only one arg?  It might make sense to
> > just default the missing arg to `.', but it could go in either
> > location.  Something like:
> > 
> >    tla delta REV   =>  tla delta REV .
> > 
> > Seems good to me though (e.g., using one arg defaults to showing changes
> > from a past-revision to the current tree).
> 
> tla changes <past revision>
> 
> Rob
> -- 
> GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.



> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
> 
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec 
<address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature