[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Cvsnt] Re: Latest core CVS source

From: Tony Hoyle
Subject: Re: [Cvsnt] Re: Latest core CVS source
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 23:17:54 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-ac26 i686; en-US; 0.8.1) Gecko/20010326

Terris wrote:

This is a good example of why Microsoft
has nothing to fear from open source.

I wouldn't use cvs as an example... it's in the same state gcc was in before it forked and became egcs (which has since become the official release again).

If you look at stuff like the linux kernel, or XFree86, their development moves quite quickly. Stuff is tried, either works or doesn't work, then moves on.

Even cvsnt moves quicker. If someone sends me a patch I look at it - 90% of them are 'obviously correct', a few need some clarification. I'll then put the patch in with a 'try this it's new and might not work properly' warning... if nobody complains it stays in.

I've only really broken the tree once that I can remember, and that version never got released. cvsnt would be much worse off if I hadn't applied, for example, the diff patches (which reduced the number of false conflicts to almost zero).

Of course, to be fair, something like
this would never happen with the Perl

A good example... The new perl 6 stuff looks interesting.


Don't click on this sig - a cyberwoozle will eat your underwear.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]