Re: Re: Maintaining 'stable' and 'development' versionsof a repository (hopeless newbie question)
Chris Siebenmann <[email protected]> Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:02:59 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.version-control.bitkeeper.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
| What BK explicitly guarantees is that if you acquire a set of test | data for a node in your change graph, that test data will *always* | be valid for that node, no matter what you do to the archive in the | future. I don't believe that allowing people to use BK to pull changes without their nominal dependencies affects this. You're not changing existing repository history; you're just adding a new changeset in a way that's more convenient (and more inside the VCS, and allows more information to be preserved) than generating a patch using the other repository and feeding it in by hand (or script). If you then later merge between the two repositories you will have a situation where the same change appears in two different changesets (and causes you some degree of merge heartburn) -- but again this is no different than the existing situation if one uses patches, plus the VCS has a chance to do better since it knows more. If you have a requirement that all (master) repository checkins or state snapshots have to pass testing, then that requirement exists regardless of how the change arrived in the repository: pull, merge, edited a file, applied a patch, imported an out-of-sequence changeset, whatever. I don't believe that adding another way to generate a new changeset makes the situation any different. - cks