Re: on subtree checkout
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Feb 26, 2008, 11:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LSU.1.00.0802261119590.17164@racer.site>
- In-Reply-To
- <ee77f5c20802251830p47c6de60je97a31cb34bc3105@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, David Symonds wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Johannes Schindelin > <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > But I agree with others that you should think about sane > > implementations of rebase/merge with partial checkouts. > > I, too, was shortly going to attempt a partial checkout/clone > implementation. The intended context of my implementation was similar to > the KDE scenario in that you might only care about /pkgA and /pkgB, so > changes to /pkgC are usually irrelevant and independent to your > work-flow, so I was planning to assume a simplistic "theirs" merge > strategy for /pkgC, etc.
That might work for the people who have partial checkouts. But I see a lot of problems looming there: just imagine a documenter rebased on top of 'master', and _then_ on top of a branch by another documenter, which is newer with respect to documentation, but older with respect to the code.
It is _really_ easy to break code if you have no intention to test the result of a merge, _especially_ so when it is a "theirs" strategy.
Ciao, Dscho