[RFC] Workingstyle of different VCS systems

[Andreas Pakulat]

On 12.04.07 14:31:49, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> Andras Mantia wrote:
> > On Thursday 05 April 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> I just realized a potential issue; do we have a plan for how to go about 
> splitting an interface without breaking the API/ABI if that should be 
> needed? E.g. if we have an interface that provides foo and bar, and 
> later want to implement a back-end for a VCS that only provides bar, 
> what happens?

Well, without much thinking I'd say: create 2 new interfaces. This of
course won't work for the main interface, but all optional should work.

> >> resource diff - show a difference between local file and latest VCS
> >> version, or 2 VCS versions
> > I don't really see a use case for this.
> 
> You've *never* done a diff? I do them all the time (like right before 
> commits, especially). This so astounds me that I am certain there must 
> be a miscommunication.

Yeap, Andras means he doesn't see a use case where a script needs this
action.

> > tagging was mentioned in the thread. It is probably worth to have. But 
> > branching should (the actions can be different in VCS systems).
> 
> I forget what the consensus here was. In perforce, copy()/move(), 
> merge() and branch() are all implemented by "p4 integrate", and then 
> there is maybe tag() which is the same as branch() in svn but totally 
> different in perforce.

Branching is different from copy or move in CVS (AFAIK) so we need
branch and tag I think.

Andreas

-- 
So you're back... about time...