tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299268788060304266.post3104320185408839188..comments2007-10-29T03:32:43.873-06:00James Dwyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00778440860367802024noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299268788060304266.post-70090929714627679092007-10-29T03:32:43.873-06:002007-10-29T03:32:43.873-06:00Jerry, <BR/><BR/>as I see it, the difference is that you can shelve your changes without being finished. Maybe you were half way through a huge refactor, and someone comes to you with an urgent production bug, where the needed changes are affected by your refactor. <BR/><BR/>You can shelve your refactor without breaking the build for others, and then pick it up again later.<BR/><BR/>MichaelMichaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14924482680296581131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299268788060304266.post-73884951768075673262007-05-02T14:43:24.641-06:002007-05-02T14:43:24.641-06:00This sounds really cool, and I plan on checking it out (I'm in IJ 6 user), but I have a question.<BR/><BR/>How is this different than my revision control system merging any changes in when I check out the latest? Many systems I've used try and merge my local changes with the latest. Would this work better or be used in a different fashion?<BR/><BR/>JerryJerryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04256239917523494645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299268788060304266.post-19557448003651007982007-04-24T21:34:10.951-06:002007-04-24T21:34:10.951-06:00Hi there,<BR/><BR/> I can understand your excitement. Especially if you lost some of your changes since the changes to the deployment vanished once you ran the build again!<BR/><BR/>TYPO : I hate to be a silly pointer but you've got a typo at the end<BR/><BR/>"he delight is almost too much to bare..."<BR/><BR/>you meant : too much to bear ?<BR/><BR/>Thank you,<BR/><BR/>BR,<BR/>~AAnjanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01902768305914200908noreply@blogger.com