[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: gcl-2.6.8pre on MAC OSX 10.2

From: Gabriel Dos Reis
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: gcl-2.6.8pre on MAC OSX 10.2
Date: 03 Nov 2006 16:49:22 +0100

Ralf Hemmecke <address@hidden> writes:

| On 11/03/2006 12:23 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
| > Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| >> This clarifiers the terminology for me.
| Not for me.
| Bill seemed to conflict himself when he said that
| a)
|  > In any case, please keep in mind that we had previously agreed that
|  > all patches to silver would be sent by email to Tim Daly and that
|  > he would be responsible for review and applying these changes to
|  > axiom--silver--1. That is the route by which patches are supposed
|  > to the new svn /silver "trunk".
| and
| b)
|  > SVN /trunk was created to be Silver from which the
|  > experimental branches would be branched.
|  >
|  > > > axiom--silver--1 was created to be a pre-gold version of
|  > > > the system with "early release" of changes so they can be
|  > > > tested.
|  >
|  > No. axiom--silver--1 was created to be a mirror of SVN /trunk
|  > (now called SVN /silver) so that you would not have to deal
|  > with the problems of using SVN.
| And I have written something on
| which is certainly not up-to-date. Unfortunately I am to confused by
| what is master-silver and what are the copies so that I cannot update
| this page.
| Please, please, don't let the AxiomSources page get out-of-date. With
| all this SCM mess nobody is going to understand where to start with.
| > 1) Should any new patch be applied to /trunk ?
| If we all agreed to send patches to Tim for review, then I would say no.
| Silver should always be the same on axiom--silver--1, SF-/silver
| Google/trunk (or is it also Google/silver?).

Thanks Ralf.

Clearly I, too, am confused about this whole replictor business.

If we can manage to be confused about which is which at this point, then
clearly something is wrong.  A week ago, I received private
communications about decreasing the number of "master" repos --
because it just is too confusing.  I suspect this is another strong
evidence to support the claim.

Now, I'm really confused about what we said we will do (and we are not 
doing), what are doing (and we should not be doing), and what we
should be doing (and are not doing).

As I have stated publically, I'm not a big fan of "forks".
But at this very point I'm considering very seriously about forking
and be done with it.

-- Gaby

reply via email to

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