Building a tool to make the process automated
eddy.petrisor at gmail.com
Wed Jun 13 01:10:31 CEST 2007
Martin Fick wrote:
> Lastly, I have a conceptual enhancement for the
> svnauto tool that I have been thinking about for a
> while, maybe something that you want to consider for
> your project also. The problem: I have directories
> that I do not want autoversioned, say a source code
> directory for which I want each commit to be a manual
> commit with a normal developer's commit message. But
> within these directories I still want the safety of an
> autoversioning system!
This sounds a lot like what I am doing manually with svn/cvs repos when I don't have commit access there.
For these cases (or when I simply don't want to commit yet) I initialize a darcs repo at a higher level than the
checkout, over the cvs/svn checkout and I keep recording in darcs, while I ignore the cvs/svn diff. This allows me to
have the benefits of a DVCS (especially history) without having to have access in the upstream centralized VCS.
Probably svk or bazaar-NG would be a better choice to combine with svn repos.
> The solutions I can think of involve copying the
> unversioned (or changed but not checked in files) to a
> hidden subdirectory which can then be autoversioned
> into a separate junk repository. I don't care if the
> junk repository fills up, the goal is to prune it
> often. If later a file that was unversioned in the
> primary repository gets added to the primary repo, it
> will get deleted from the junk repo, (potentially this
> would be a good time to actually prune it from the
> junk repo?) When I get more time to think about this
> idea I will add a proposal to the wiki.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the vcs-home