Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Ongoing Comparison Between Version Control Systems

[Robert Anderson]

On Sun, 2003-09-07 at 21:58, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Mark A. Flacy wrote:
> 
> >
> > I'm curious why you assert that CVS supports file copies while Arch
> > doesn't.
> >
> 
> CVS does not support file copies at the repository level. Subversion does.
> 
> > For that matter, what semantic value is there for maintaining a "history"
> > of a clone of a file?  It's a new file with a new purpose.
> >
> 
> For merging and for tracking changes to previous versions of the file?
> It's also less resource-hungry, time-consuming and space-consuming.

For merging, huh?

So if I "clone" a file after a branch, and make some changes to both
files, then merge that branch into a branch where the file has not been
cloned, what happens?

If I "clone" a file after a branch, and make some changes to the file in
the branch in which it has not been "cloned", then merge those branches,
what happens?

If I "clone" a file after a branch, and rename one of the clones, then I
merge that branch back to a branch where the file has not been cloned,
what happens?

Bob