> > Though a distributed VCS and not a centralized VCS is not really that > necessary I use git mainly because it is fast, not because it is > distributed. So I don't see why a distributed VCS would be any worse > than a centralized one. The AUR is never going to be merging from > another repo anyways... right? It would basically be read-only and > might not even be publicly available as a repository so I don't see > what difference it makes. > > You could even go off on a tangent and have AUR maintainers be able to > push to their own git repository on AUR ... muah. >
A distributed VCS is nice because it allows someone to clone the repository and then commit to their local copy without necessarily pushing to a master repository. For example I download a PKGBUILD for package 'x'. I want to add support for LDAP, so I add --enable-ldap to ./configure. Now I commit my changes to my local clone. Then if the PKGBUILD on AUR changes, it is not necessary for me to repeat the process. I simply 'git pull' (s/git/whateverDVCSyouwant/) and the updates are merged for me. I don't believe a centralized VCS is capable of this. LDAP makes everything so much more complicated! I avoid it whenever > possible. > That is nonsense. With LDAP support one could for example query the details of a package "$pkgname" using the command: curl "ldap:// ldap.archlinux.org/ou=community,dc=archlinux,dc=org??one?(pkgname=$pkgname)" There's no way you can tell me that that's not awesome. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
