Re: Subversion migration.

Murray Cumming wrote:

>Thanks. This is very useful. It would be nice to also see the commands
>for making /applying a patch. Apparently they are also similar to cvs,
>so people might find it reassuring that they would not be forced to
>change how they get contributions if using Arch.
There are really three cases here:

1. in the best case scenario, both the patch creator and patch applier
are using arch.  In this case, the person working on the changes simply
has to publish their archive somewhere people can access it, and ask the
patch applier to merge that branch.

2. If you are developing a patch for someone not using Arch (e.g. if you
are working from the archives), the process is very
similar to CVS. Running "baz diff" will show you all the uncommitted
changes in your tree in unified diff format (it diffs the entire tree
though, rather than just the subtree you are in at the moment).  The
resulting diff is suitable for applying with the patch utility.

If you've been developing some changes on a local branch, you can get
the differences to the mainline branch with "baz diff
mainline-branch-name".  One difference compared to CVS here is that the
diff will include changes to arch control files.  If you are sending
changes to someone not using arch, this probably looks like a downside. 
However, if they are using arch, this additional metadata is actually
helpful, and will record the fact that they applied your changes.

3. If you receive a patch from someone not using arch, you can commit it
the same way you would with CVS.  Just apply the patch to your working
tree, resolve the conflicts (if any), and commit.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]