Bo Peng wrote:
Right now, if I may summarize the opinion of the lead developers: you
will have to rebase all your work on trunk step by step, logical change
by logical change. It's obviously a waste of time and most of the time
invested in your branch is basically lost. I will discourage anyone
trying to work in branch.
That is part of the reason why I do not use branches. I simply work
locally, and keep my tree up to date using 'svn up'. When a feature is
ready, I will generate a big patch for review. If the patch is too
big, I am willing to split it by functionally separated parts.
Cheers,
Bo
I very warmly recommend using "quilt" (the best place I've found for
getting started with it is here:
http://www.coffeebreaks.org/blogs/wp-content/archives/talks/2005/quilt/quiltintro-s5.html)
It is a wonderful tool aimed specifically at making it easier to handle
multiple patches. It'll take you at most a few days to get used to, and
it makes life so much easier. There are also a few alternatives
mentioned, I haven't tried them myself, though...
Another alternative would be to move (either individually --- or
collectively?!) to a distributed version control system. Two that I've
had my eye on, but haven't tried out yet, are mercurial
(http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/) and git (http://git.or.cz/ --
seems to be down at the moment). I'm not really suggesting that we
switch to those --- at least not yet --- but I think it should be
possible for individuals to experiment with these, and it should help
with working on different things at the same time. And once some
individuals have a repository up and running, and keeping up to date
with the svn repository, it'll be much easier for others to play around
with this as well. I believe there are also scripts for converting from
svn to both of these...
Hope this helps!
Dov
