Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Gregory Stark wrote:
> > > > You're still merging patches and reviewing patches by hand, without any of the
> > > > tools to, for example, view incremental changes in the branch, view the logs
> > > > of the branch, merge the branch into the code automatically taking into
> > > > account the known common ancestor. Instead of receiving a 20k patch without
> > > > any tools to work with it you would be given a branch name and be able to view
> > > > and merge it into the main branch using the tools.
> > >
> > > I don't see this as a win. I understand the ability to see the patch as
> > > separate revisions by the user, but for patch application, we really
> > > need to see the diff -c of the entire patch.
> >
> > The fact that you're still thinking in "patch application" means you're
> > still stuck in the CVS worldview. To "apply a patch" in a distributed
> > SCM(*) really means to merge a branch into the main development branch.
> > Of course, you can still see the entire "diff -c" if you want.
>
> How do I modify the patch before application if it comes from a branch?
You commit your change to the branch.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
