Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)
Date
Msg-id 6146.1080188983@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)  ("Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>)
Responses Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)
List pgsql-hackers
"Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes:
> I would guess that better merging might be a real motivation for
> people.  If a patch that takes a month to develop can still apply
> cleanly despite significant code drift in the interrem, I could see
> that as a real motivating factor.

Not here.  You want me to trust some bit of code (with absolutely zero
understanding of the source text it's hacking on) to figure out how to
resolve conflicting patches?  That sounds like a recipe for big-time
unhappiness.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] unicode error and problem
Next
From: Dustin Sallings
Date:
Subject: Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)