harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sian January" <sianjanu...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Preprocessor - CHECKPOINT
Date Thu, 02 Nov 2006 15:07:41 GMT
On 02/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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.


That's very unfortunate.  I had assumed that SVN was a superset of CVS as
it's more recent, but obviously I was wrong :-(

> 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.


Yes - that seems to make much more sense.

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
>



-- 
Sian January

IBM Java Technology Centre, UK

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message