harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Preprocessor - CHECKPOINT
Date Thu, 02 Nov 2006 14:50:46 GMT


Sian January wrote:
> I believe that in CVS when you make a branch there's nothing in it to 
> begin with, so if you check out code from the branch it looks the same 
> as code in head.  Then if a change is made in a file in head and that 
> file hasn't been changed in the branch that change is reflected in the 
> branch.  My understanding is that SVN is based on CVS so I think it 
> should work the same way.  

Nope.

There is really no such thing as a branch or tag in SVN.  It's just a 
copy.  I think it's the feature I miss most from CVS.

> So my point was that if it's only a small 
> number of classes that are branched then integrating fixes shouldn't be 
> that problematic.  Please feel free to correct me if any of those 
> assumptions are wrong.
>  
> Just thinking about J2ME, I can imagine that some source files are going 
> to be very different.  For example there are no Java 5 features in J2ME, 
> so any generic classes will have to be almost completely different.  My 
> concern is that trying to combine two quite different classes in the 
> same file is going be very difficult to read and understand.

Right.  I don't know the first thing about ME.  Maybe we should come up 
w/ use cases based on Java 6 (as we're going to do it at some point) and 
work from there.

geir

>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Sian
> 
> 
> On 02/11/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* <geir@pobox.com 
> <mailto:geir@pobox.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     Sian January wrote:
>      > I may be totally off track here, but how about just having two copies
>      > of all the files that differ?  I don't believe it would be that many,
>      > and it would save us from having complicated source files or
>     having to
>      > use special tools or special IDE plug-ins.  For me the value of
>     having
>      > clearly readable source code and being able to use an IDE out of
>     the box
>      > outweighs any extra effort there may be with this solution.
> 
>     Because I think that still means we have separate branches, and thus
>     the
>     integration problem for fixes.
> 
>     geir
> 
>      >
>      > Regards,
>      >
>      > Sian
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > On 31/10/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* <geir@pobox.com
>     <mailto:geir@pobox.com>
>      > <mailto:geir@pobox.com <mailto:geir@pobox.com>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     So we all agree that it's not an ideal solution.
>      >
>      >     Can anyone think of anything else?  No one said this was
>     going to be
>      >     easy...
>      >
>      >     geir
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > --
>      > Sian January
>      >
>      > IBM Java Technology Centre, UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sian January
> 
> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK

Mime
View raw message