[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Revision control
From: |
Michael Banck |
Subject: |
Re: Revision control |
Date: |
Wed, 28 May 2008 23:37:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) |
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:34:41PM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> I like the idea.
>
> It would lower the barrier to begin coding on the hurd (I think), and it
> would
> be a good opportunity to clean up the cvs chaos a bit (so newcomers don't get
> completely lost in the different repositories).
>
> Also it has the advantage to remove the central point of failure, which feels
> very Hurd-like to me: Everyone has a full copy of the repository, and only
> the reference repository is under central control.
Well, CVS is certainly doomed, but I don't think the above two points
are strong arguments. Probably gnumach-1-branch should be moved back to
HEAD, yes, but otherwise, the CVS looks pretty decent to me (note that
glibc still manages to use CVS, which is a far bigger project commit and
code-wise).
Also, a central repo is not much of a SPOF, if Savannah goes down with
all its backups, we got bigger problems than worrying about the Hurd I
guess.
Michael
Re: Revision control, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/05/30