From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org>
Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct page, new bk tree
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 12:31:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020220123105.J27423@work.bitmover.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020220201716.45A574E2E@oscar.casa.dyndns.org>; from tomlins@cam.org on Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 03:17:12PM -0500
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 03:17:12PM -0500, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> In my opinion the idea of cset -x (while usefull) is fundamentally
> broken. The result of this is that ideas like blacklist need to be
> considered. I would propose instead an undo -x, that would
> generate a cset to reverse the one following the -x. This might
> lead to conflicts - these would be resolved the normal bk fashion.
> If bk handled ?bad? csets in this manner there would be no need for
> blacklists - it is more robust in that you can always used undo -x.
First of all, cset -x is functionally equivalent to what you call
undo -x. They do the same thing. Second of all, cset -x is _much_
better. It does the same thing without introducing any new diffs
into the history. Go get a test tree, make a changeset, clone
the tree, cset -x the changeset, and diff the revision history files.
All you will see is something like this:
^As 00000/00000/00455
^Ad D 1.32 02/02/20 09:50:05 lm 33 32
^Ax 32
^Ac Exclude
^AcC
^AcK50774
^Ae
The "^Ax 32" line says "exclude the change who's serial number is 32".
No reverse diffs applied to the file. Much nicer. Merges work like
this too, in reverse, it just includes the branch deltas.
But all of this misses the real point - Linus, with justification, doesn't
want the revision history cluttered up with
Idea 1.
Remove Idea 1.
Idea 2.
Remove Idea 2.
But we need some way to let changes get into the system so others can review
them, test them, merge them with their stuff and test, etc. But then when
they are found to be wanting, we need a way to tell other people that those
csets are verboten.
I'm open to suggestions, this is a much harder problem than it appears
because of the fact that the revision histories are all replicas
possibly with local data. Unlike CVS, there is no one place to go to
edit the RCS files and obliterate some change.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-20 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-19 23:47 Rik van Riel
2002-02-19 23:57 ` Larry McVoy
2002-02-20 19:07 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-02-20 19:27 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-20 20:17 ` Ed Tomlinson
2002-02-20 20:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-02-20 20:31 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020220123105.J27423@work.bitmover.com \
--to=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=tomlins@cam.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox