Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #77257
| From | Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: hg, git, fossil, ... |
| Date | 2014-08-29 08:59 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87y4u7vnsh.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> (permalink) |
| References | (10 earlier) <mailman.13519.1409165474.18130.python-list@python.org> <87tx4xw3ye.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <mailman.13568.1409240362.18130.python-list@python.org> <87oav4wpu0.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <mailman.13593.1409278877.18130.python-list@python.org> |
Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>: > So then to tag or branch a release I guess you would create the same > tag/branch on every single component subrepository? And when you need > to checkout that old version you checkout every subrepository > independently. Sounds painful, but not unworkable. Where I work, we actually have "made a science" out of componentization. The individual components are very similar to linux's development packages. They are released internally and have their own life cycles. In particular, they are not rebuilt when the dependent application is built. > that old revision of that component may not be compatible with the > other components at HEAD. You don't alter ABIs. Component versioning and interdependencies are managed rigorously. Even ABI breakages could be handled should they arise. > Even if it is, you're still checking out a version of the repository > that never actually existed. You can't expect to reproduce behavior at > a particular revision if you can't even consistently recreate the > revision. Generally, components only go forward linearly. If your ancient application version needs a fresh bug fix in a component, it gets the latest and greatest component version. Branching is supported but has yet to be needed. Marko
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Python vs C++ Amirouche Boubekki <amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> - 2014-08-26 10:12 +0200
Re: Python vs C++ alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 15:43 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 00:23 -0600
Re: Python vs C++ Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 00:33 -0600
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-08-27 09:50 +0200
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-08-27 09:38 -0700
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-27 20:14 +0300
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 10:41 -0700
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 08:46 +1000
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 08:31 +0300
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 15:44 +1000
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-08-27 21:41 +0200
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 18:03 +1000
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-08-27 07:54 -0400
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 10:29 -0700
hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-08-27 11:26 -0700
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-08-27 13:51 -0500
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 08:58 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-28 09:56 -0500
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-08-28 11:39 -0400
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 19:17 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-28 11:32 -0500
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 02:38 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 22:37 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 09:08 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2014-08-29 09:43 +0200
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:54 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-28 13:40 -0400
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 07:25 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-08-28 22:41 +0100
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 20:20 -0600
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 08:59 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 17:20 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:48 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 12:24 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 19:53 -0700
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 19:56 -0600
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 08:50 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 17:19 +1000
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:43 +0300
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-08-27 11:58 -0700
Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 09:07 +1000
Re: Python vs C++ Amirouche Boubekki <amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 15:15 +0200
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-08-28 15:44 +0200
Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 23:58 +1000
csiph-web