[asdf-devel] Question about git

[Samium Gromoff]

From: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb at informatimago.com>
> You can think of a repository as a sequence of patches.

Here and throughout the message you confuse repositories and branches
-- branches are sequences of patches, not repositories.

> Having different repositories is having different sequences of patches.
> 
> 
> When you only have one repository, when you commit you have only one  
> patch to merge, so it is usually trivial (ie. automatic) or easy to  
> merge it in.
> 
> When you have several patches to commit, then things become more  
> complex.  Notice that your successive patches are made against the  
> sources patched by the previous ones.  If during the merge with the  
> repository these previous patches had to be modified, the subsequent  
> patches may have to be too.
> 
> So merging two repositories is more complex than working with only  
> one, in the situations where the patches collide.
> 
> 
> Fortunately, in big software systems as we work on nowadays, it  
> doesn't occur too often (ie. you may be working on the driver modules  
> in one repository and in the kernel memory system in the other, and  
> when you have to merge the two repositories, all the patches are  
> disjoints).
> 
> Of course, if you both are working on the same parts of ADSL, it's not  
> a good idea to work off different repositories, or the merge task will  
> be daunting.

You still can work in different repositories (and, ergo, different
branches), just sync the branches often, in both directions, and always
work off the latest changes -- this is semantically equivalent to
working on a single branch in a centralised repository.

Of course this adds the two-way sync overhead.


regards,
  Samium Gromoff
--
                                 _deepfire-at-feelingofgreen.ru
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org