[Top][All Lists]

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

[Axiom-developer] Re: Which source distributions should we list?

From: daly
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Re: Which source distributions should we list?
Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:49:45 -0500


> 1. What are the "approved" sources for AxiomGold? I am assuming CVS
> on Savannah and Sourceforge?

The "master" copy lives in Arch on
It is mirrored to CVS on Sourceforge and CVS on Savannah.
The outside, non-developer world seems mostly to be CVS.

> 2. Is the most current tarball still from 2005?

Depends. Where are you looking? We discussed a webpage that had
a matrix of tarballs per platform. I put together such a page but
I don't believe anyone contributed. When this version goes Gold
perhaps we need to concentrate on that.

> 3. Silver is moving from arch to Git ....

There is no need to be concerned because silver is also available
in SVN format on sourceforge.

> 4. About the testing branches listed for GNU Arch....

As far as I know there was no work on those branches that did not
get merged into Gold. Those branches are dead.

> 5. The subversion branches I assume are all still active ....

Build-improvements and wh-sandbox are clearly active. 
Hersen-algebra-improvements might or might not be.

> Does it contain any work not prsent in other branches?

I presume there is an SVN command that can compare them but I'm
not familiar enough with SVN to know. My use of SVN in work goes
thru some windows (tortoise?) tool so I don't know any command
line incantations.

> 6. Darcs and Mercurial obviously will stay.....

Bill likes these tools so clearly they won't go away. 

There is no need to agonize over the various choices. The choice
of source code control depends on your style of working. Choose
one, work with it. Post your diff-Naur changesets. Since this is
a common format that works with everything we can all apply the
changes to our own repositories.


reply via email to

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