[p4] "why should I restrict a changelist to a branch?"
jab at pobox.com
Tue Mar 8 07:36:14 PST 2005
At 2005-03-07 17:35:50+0000, "Jay Glanville" writes:
> His counter to my counter was, "So what? Once they branched, they now
> have separate lives. If I want to apply a single change to both
> versions, I'll do it in a single changelist. Besides, what does an
> integrate actually mean? Does it mean that the branches are
> synchronized? What does it mean when I've only propagated some changes
> and not all? Performing 'p4 integrate' doesn't actually give me
My initial response to Jay wasn't cc'ed to the list. This one is.
My initial thoughts were, "no one's a perfect typist" and that anyone
a change ("cut/paste" is a form of retyping) when the tools do it
directly, is inviting
I believe that I'd seriously evaluate my "p4 protect" table and trigger
setup, if I had
a user who was hostile to the notion of "key in the work in one place,
to propagate to others". More specifically, I'd have a trigger that
to multiple trees at the same time, and would work with the developers
to try to
have a script that propagates "easy" changes from a child codeline to
If that wasn't sufficient, I'd start reworking permissions to enforce
(as opposed to "suggest")
ps. It's worth remarking to this .... uhhh... guy, that "p4 resolve -n"
followed by 20 seconds
of think-time and then "p4 resolve -am", is going to be a very good
thing to know about.
More information about the perforce-user