On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 12:23, C. Maj wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Steven Critchfield waxed: > > > On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 10:32, C. Maj wrote: > > > On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Chris Albertson waxed: > > > > > > > (see update command in cvs manpage). So, yes you could have > > > > multiple lines of developmentand merge them back into a main line. > > > > > > Yeah and live in a nightmare. The kernel only uses CVS as a > > > daily (or whatever) dump of what's in BitKeeper. People > > > submit patches against CVS, sure, but the "branching" is > > > done with BK repositories. > > > > > > http://www.bitkeeper.com/ > > > > Well without dredging up the BK vs. every other revision control > > software flame war, lets just point out that that wouldn't be a viable > > option here. > > Point being the kernel doesn't use CVS, so it's apples and > oranges. You seemed to imply previously in this thread that > the kernel worked like that and this is how branches or > "mini forks" are created, through CVS. My apologies if that > was a glib interpretation of your comments. I'm just trying > to determine whether it is your lack of knowledge about BK > that would lead you to suggest that it's not a viable option > or something else. Could you please explain ? > > > I would suggest subversion, but it is easier to stick with what more > > people know at this moment and not force anyone to deal with the > > conversion of the tree one more time. > > They don't have to. Only the developers who want to keep > their own branches would. Their bleeding stuff could be > pushed back into Digium's repository, for example, and > run BK2CVS on it there for the masses.
Please understand that I don't want to get into the Bitkeeper flame war here. It is well documented on other lists, and it was argued by people more appropriate than us. What I am trying to suggest is that there should be some way for Digium to host and manage the repository while they open it up for a few to further develop portions to be folded back. A central authority is needed for tracking and managing this. I already documented my concerns about this control leaving Digium. I feel we could essentially pull off what the kernel developers have done in such a way that would allow us to regain some of the speedy development that was happening before the mailing list exploded. -- Steven Critchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
