Version control systems
marco-oweber at gmx.de
Fri Aug 22 00:42:10 EDT 2008
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:21:47PM +1000, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> From what you are saying, it seems that one "advantage" of git (in-place
> branch switching) is not going to be useful to GHC in any case (because we
> use nested repositories).
I don't agree. I feel it's convinient. But I make full copies as well
because switching the shell with my window manager is faster than
checking out another branch.. But this depends on what I want to do.
> Ian Lynagh:
> > The in-tree branching style also sounds like it won't work well with
> > trees you are working in: If you have a tree built with branch X, and
> > then you swap to branch Y for a minute and then back to branch X, then
> > the timestamps on any source files that differ between the branches will
> > have changed, so the build won't think it is up-to-date any more and you
> > will get needless recompilation.
Which is the fault of make not of git.. Why can't we configure make to
use checksum based recompilations (that's possile using scons)
Maybe it's possible to hack this in some way?
I'd recommend having one working clone and one for browsing.
Than you need two clones, but not n (you would have to mantain with
Why do you want to switch for a minute? There are tools such as gitk/
qgit letting you browse the repository (and all file contents) without
switching. I don't think that recompilation is a real issue.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users