On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2002 15:57 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 08:47:17PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > I've removed the old (broken) bitkeeper tree with the
> > > struct page changes and have put a new one in the same
> > > place ... with the struct page changes in one changeset
> > > with ready checkin comment.
> > developer goes back, cleans up the change, and repeats. That's fine for
> > Linus & Rik because Linus tosses the changeset and Rik tosses it, but
> > what about the other people who have pulled? Those changesets are now
> > wandering around in the network, just waiting to pop back into a tree.
> > We could have a --blacklist option to undo which says "undo these
> > changes but remember their "names" in the BitKeeper/etc/blacklist file.
> So what happens to the person who pulled the (now-blacklited) CSET in
> the first place? If they do a pull from the repository where the original
> CSET lived, will the blacklisted CSET be undone and the replacement CSET
> be used in its place?
That's a good question. I hadn't answered Larry before because
I just couldn't come up with what the implications of a blacklist
would be or how it would ever work ...
regards,
Rik
-- Will hack the VM for food.http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 23 2002 - 21:00:26 EST