From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What a modern collaboration toolkit looks like Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:40 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20080101171120.GC3830@muc.de> <20080101.190535.32709273.wl@gnu.org> <20080101182742.GE3830@muc.de> <20080101.192802.05328072.wl@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199267707 4779 80.91.229.12 (2 Jan 2008 09:55:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:55:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esr@thyrsus.com, acm@muc.de, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, esr@snark.thyrsus.com To: Werner LEMBERG Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 02 10:55:27 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JA0Jl-0005Hx-BO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:55:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0JP-0000S5-9h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:54:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0IE-00089t-1D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:46 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0IB-00089C-Pq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0I9-00088t-Tg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:42 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JA0I9-0001Y2-BP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:41 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JA0I8-0002I3-Hq; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:53:40 -0500 In-reply-to: <20080101.192802.05328072.wl@gnu.org> (message from Werner LEMBERG on Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:28:02 +0100 (CET)) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:85870 Archived-At: You can commit a change offline (git commit). Later on, when you are online, you say `git pull' to get the current state of the repository, and automatical merging happens (and the usual warnings if there are conflicts). Finally, you say `git push' to synchronize your git repository with the global one. Is this substantially different from CVS, or is it just relabeling? It sounds like `git push' is basically equivalent to CVS commit. With CVS, until you commit your changes, new changes can be installed in the repository, and when you DO get around to committing your changes, you will have to merge them with whatever others have installed. Once you commit, others trying to commit will have the burden of merging their changes with your already-committed changes. With git, I would guess that the same situation obtains until you do `git push' with your changes. Thus, I think that `git push' is the true analogue to CVS commit. This is based on surmise rather than knowledge. If it is wrong, where is the mistake?