Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote:
>Yes, but what was being talked about now was what people who had the
>repository checked out had to do. The cost to implement the change in
>the repo only has to be paid once, the cost to rebase needs to be paid
>for each checked out tree.
Not quite.
What I said was:
> Git gives you tools to actually fix that with a small price to pay:
>
> anyone who already synced from that branch, will have to rebase, but
>
> other than that, there is no downtime, no complicated dump-editing;
> it's all less-filling and easy to use.
In git you can fix a commit, even if you notice the mistake an hour
after checking things in. You can fix it without dumping/restoring the
repository. The only problem would be people that already commited new
commits on top of your commit, those commits get new hashes and need to
be rebased.
--
Sincerely,
Stephen R. van den Berg.
"People who think they know everything are annoying to those of us who do."
