2005/10/14, Martin Langhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > We used tagline for internal projects. It did work while tla had 100% > control of what was happening. As I mentioned earlier, such a > regimented workflow covered perhaps 10% of the code we work on.
I maintain a bunch of Emacs-related trees in arch. However they are all still officially maintained in CVS, so the majority of changes take place in CVS land, from which I merge. Arch works _brilliantly_ in this scenario, precisely because taglines _do_ survive the out-of-arch periods. If a tagline-bearing file gets renamed in CVS, I still get precise rename info when I merge from CVS. For files which cannot have a tagline added for some reason, my merge-from-CVS scripts do something similar to what you say GIT does -- they use "file similarity" to make rename judgements. The point being, having precise rename info doesn't preclude using other methods of rename detection when the former isn't available for some reason -- but when it _is_ available, you can do much better. It's a pure win. [Arch's "identity based" (as opposed to "history based") rename detection is a rather nice fit with such methods, actually.] -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
