From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266090AbTLaBt4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:49:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266094AbTLaBt4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:49:56 -0500 Received: from ipcop.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.15]:41900 "EHLO work.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266090AbTLaBty (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:49:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:49:52 -0800 From: Larry McVoy Message-Id: <200312310149.hBV1nqK28047@work.bitmover.com> To: bitkeeper-users@work.bitmover.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [BK] cset -x improvement (prototype) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Some of you use the cset -x feature in BK (which is a way of undoing the effects of a particular changeset). The documented behaviour of cset -x is that it only undoes content changes, not renames, creates, permissions, etc. This interface is unique in that respect, all the other interfaces in BK operate on all attributes, not just contents. I've prototyped a version of the interface which works on contents, names, and permissions, and in addition also uses the BK merge tools to merge any conflicting changes as a result of the undo of the changeset. This is JUST A PROTOTYPE and has a lot of limitations but I'd like some feedback on whether this is a good direction and we should productize this or if this is not helpful to you. If you use cset -x and want a better version of that interface, drop me an email and I'll send you the shell script (please make sure to send mail to me directly, not to the lists, because (a) they don't need to see all the noise and (b) I'm no longer subscribed to the Linux kernel mailing list). Thanks, --lm