On Tuesday 30 August 2005 15:32, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Martin Langhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.08.30.1404 +0200]: > > But I'm leaving the Arch (tla/baz/bzr) boat too - patch-oriented SCMs > > were fun, but very disappointing. There is a central design flaw in > > pure patch tracking, and neither Arch nor DARCS do anything about it: > > no matter how much you track patches merged, you need to be able to > > identify convergence. GIT does this so well by being > > identity-oriented, that you can do a ton of patch trading on top (via > > email, StGIT, quilt, whatever) and things still make sense after > > merging and remerging ad infinitum. > > How does git aide you in identifying the differences in changes > between two trees?
You can have any other's work as different branches (also as separate local repositories and just diff between), then use a nice graphical tool 'gitk --all' to show you both of these branches and their histories (well the lowlevel 'git-diff-*' tools are called which you can use manually), then try to merge using 'git resolve b1 b2' [1]. Here is a more advanced example of merging [2] as well as seeing whatchanged and where. Merging is the man here. [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/tutorial.html [2] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/using-topic-branches.txt -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]