On Feb 7, 2008, at 4:06 PM, Luke Iannini (pd) wrote:
On Feb 7, 2008 12:47 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org wrote:
When looking at a file, say pd/src/s_file.c, then there are be dd- specific commits in the history, that's what I mean. As for the pd- cvs mailing list, I can live with seeing the dd commit messages there. ;)
Hi Hans, If DD is actually branched, then one would only see those commits in the log of that branch (aka directory). /desiredata/pd becomes basically independent. The only shared thing would be the log up to the point of the branch, plus whatever merging one decides to do from elsewhere (which sounds greatly improved in svn 1.5, by the way).
This is an example of what I mean, the default browse views for the logs show all of the branches. I'll be svn works similarly
http://pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net/pure-data/pd/src/s_stuff.h
branches are a tool generally used for code that is intended to be included in the code that it is branched from. When a codebase becomes a fork, then there is no longer that intension. Matju has submitted few if any patches to the tracker and has publically declared dd is a fork. So I am just suggesting that we use the tools well, which will also hopefully help some social issues.
This is not a question of whether I think DD is worthwhile or not, I have contributed work towards supporting DD and I think it is worthwhile. This is just a question of using the tools well.
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
Using ReBirth is like trying to play an 808 with a long stick. - David Zicarelli