[SciPy-dev] The future of SciPy and its development infrastructure

David Cournapeau david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac...
Mon Feb 23 12:19:59 CST 2009

Jonathan Guyer wrote:
> Ahah.  The answer to that is, don't use svnmerge. I tried it after you  
> told me about it on this list and it's a disaster, at least from our  
> perspective. We have a protocol for merges <http://matforge.org/fipy/browser/trunk/documentation/ADMINISTRATA.txt 

I kind of agree with you, that svnmerge sometimes makes things more
complicated than they really are. But how come people can say svn is
easy when you have to read a 150 lines documents for such trivial things ?

>  >, based directly on the guidance of the The SVN Book, and it works  
> very well. I was prepared to concede to you that *merging* changes  
> takes way too many steps, but you said "create a branch", which piqued  
> my curiosity.

Let's say "using" branches is a PITA in svn.

> While svnmerge appeared to dramatically simplify all of the tagging  
> and commenting that we presently have to do, in practice I found that  
> it made a complete hash of things. I have no doubt that it could be  
> used safely, but I don't believe that it actually saves any effort  
> over doing it manually. As a case in point, seven steps for what  
> should only be one.

git tag my_tag_name # create a tag
git co -b work_branch # create a new branch work_branch
git merge branch1 # merge branch1
git log branch1..work_branch # log all revisions from branch1 to work_branch

Note that I have not yet mentioned the speed: doing the above in svn
takes like 1 minute or 2 for me, whereas it takes < 1s with git.



More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list