I am sure this can be done. The problem is: 1. It would be a complex setup and may require a lot of maintenance to keep up to date
2. It would add a whole new potential bug element. In other words, if the setup, or how it worked, had a problem, you'd have something to debug that would never have existed without attempting to add the ability to switch branches. You wouldn't even know that that was the problem until you got far enough in the debug process. So, while if this system were perfect it would be a good feature, in practice it would just add an additional failure point. Thanks. Blake On Monday, October 21, 2013 9:38:59 AM UTC-5, Dale Worley wrote: > > > From: Blake McBride <blak...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > > > Not sure what you mean about designed well, but in order to switch > branches > > without having to do a full rebuild would involve: > > > > [lots of stuff] > > I believe there are commercial systems that do this. They keep track > of the derived files and what source files they depend on. Then when > you switch branches, they know everything that has to be deleted, > etc. to get the state of the build tree right. > > Dale > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
