--On Monday, June 07, 2004 1:32 PM -0700 Jim Trocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, David Nolan wrote:
(In fact, I may have posted it to the list, but I can't recall right now. Time for some > email archeology.)
ahh, i apologize for my confusion. clearly my recollection was faulty, and you now corrected it. thanks.
as far as maintaining the code in cvs with the intention of allowing better cooperation amongst ourselves, i think it's a good idea. i don't know if the sourceforge thing is what would be best. it does have some advantages, such as the bug tracking functionality, mon is already a registered project there and all (i haven't looked at that thing in forever), but cvs tends to aggravate me. i guess i've been living with it long enough to just accept it if that's all that sourceforge offers. i'd prefer giving subversion a try.
Since I use CVS everyday for all the project I work on, CVS would be fine with me. If you prefer another option, I'm sure we can work it out.
Ultimately, I'll be continuing to maintain the CMU custom version in our CVS tree, and importing changes from your version. So I'll have to deal with two different repositories anyway.
Sourceforge & CVS would seem to be the easiest path, and as Scott points out it gives us some other features as well. If you don't have any strenuous objections, why don't we go ahead and start using sourceforge? Upload the current stable version and the devel version, give me access, and I'll work on integrating my changes. (My sourceforge userid is vitroth)
-David
David Nolan <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
curses: May you be forced to grep the termcap of an unclean yacc while
a herd of rogue emacs fsck your troff and vgrind your pathalias!
_______________________________________________ mon mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
