Re: [platform-core-dev] multi-stream/rollup support, was: Issues with la

[Ed Warnicke <eaw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas,  
   I *think* you are also describing a problem that
I see frequently with needing to cross-commit
a change to multiple development branches.

   A change may be done in branch A, but for various reasons
also needs to be cross-commited to branches B,C, and D.  At times
this can be hugely non-trivial as A,B,C, and D may be enough
different that there are some merge issues applying
exactly the change set from A to B, C, or D.

   Is this the kind of thing you are refering to?

Ed
Thomas L Roche wrote:

> John Arthorne Fri, 5 Nov 2004 13:21:40 -0500
>  
>
> > This is a general call for those using Eclipse for large-scale
> > development to let us know what the major problem areas are.
> >    
>
> One of the more painful problems for those of us working on Rational
> Developer is "rolling up" commits to multiple streams at certain
> points in the cycle ... like now. My team has just (hopefully :-)
> completed v6, and now has several target streams:
>
> 0 6.0.0.1: fixes for bugs that couldn't get fixed in v6
>
> 1 6.0.1: some new function, more bug fixes
>
> 2 HEAD: everything else (the open-field, blue-sky stream)
>
> Unfortunately
>
> * typically, commits to any lesser (i.e. lower-numbered, above)
>  streams need to be "rolled up" (also committed) to the farther-out
>  streams
>
> * the platform does not easily accomodate working with multiple
>  streams (unless I'm missing something, please lemme know if so)
>
> Currently we maintain separate workspaces for each stream, and proceed
> like the following, beginning in the {lowest-down, most immediate}
> workspace:
>
> 0 Note each changed file, commit to its stream.
>
> 1 Propagate each changed file's changes to the corresponding file in
>  the next-most-immediate workspace, if one exists. (AFAIK this must
>  be done outside of eclipse, e.g. with emacs ediff-buffers.)
>
> 2 Compile/test the patched workspace, and loop.
>
> This is not too painful if a change involves only 1 file, however that
> is rarely the case. In any case, It Would Be Nice if the workbench
> could automate/ease more of the process (esp step 1), since this
> situation occurs for much of the cycle (i.e. excepting only those
> times when we are "locked down" onto one target stream/version).
>
> _______________________________________________
> platform-core-dev mailing list
> platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-core-dev
>