On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 16:30:50 +0200, "Bernd Jendrissek"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll read up on stgit (despite not even having quite conquered plain
> git - I have a love/hate relationship with it) for its apparently
> magical capabilities (I'm willing to suspend my disbelief after
> experiencing the DVCS paradigm shift).
The problem with a DVCS is that it makes it (too?) easy to wander far from
the beaten track with no obvious way to easily get back! ;) StGit's main
bonus is that it makes it dead easy to re-order changesets. This is great,
because it means that you can get all your patches into a logical sequence.
Even better is that once you've done that, you'll often see that there are
two or more patches that would make a lot of sense to combine. And you can
do that too, making your patch stack even tidier.
The main *downside* of StGit is that it doesn't play at all nicely with
merges. It's best for juggling sets of patches that will eventually get
"squashed" into a "normal" git branch.
Peter Clifton and I make extensive use of StGit in preparing our big
sequences of patches. I'd certainly find it much harder to work on gEDA
without it.
> [snip]
>
> Is there anything in particular that strikes you as particularly
> random, besides the interleaving of these "topics"?
To me, the main issue is the random interleaving.
Peter
_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
