Also, don't the others have far easier merging? On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:14:26PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote: > At the risk of repeating myself - I think we should be conservative, > and that means Subversion. > > My experience with distributed approaches has been one of confusion. > > Ian. > > On 22 Sep 2005, at 18:53, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > >There is a cvs2arch convertor. This is a bit of a hack though. It only > >works with the HEAD branch (which is okay): > >http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2003-08/msg00198.html > > > >However, arch may be dead. It *was* very popular, and *did* have a > >very > >active community, last year, but there is only one person (tom > >lord) on > >the savannah dev list, and rumours of it dying a death after he > >left. It > >is also probably a bit complex to use. Also can be quite slow > >fetching a > >revision. However it is post-1.0, and widely used, so presumably > >fairly > >stable. Also does not support Windows well. > > > >Also there is a more general and stable convertor that can move > >between > >CVS, ArX, Darcs, and Monotone: > >http://darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor > > > >Darcs is interesting, although it has a couple of issues: > >http://abridgegame.org/darcs/ > >http://lwn.net/Articles/110516/#Comments > >Darcs does not have cryptographic signatures, which is an interesting > >side-issue. Also can be slow in merging. Can import from CVS, Arch or > >Subversion. More on darcs and arch [2] - search for darcs. > > > >ArX is also promising: > >http://www.nongnu.org/arx/ > >Has all the basic features, should be reasonably simple to use, is > >more > >or less fully distributed but slow over high latency networking. > >Hopefully this won't be a problem for Freenet 0.7. > > > >So, does anyone have any opinions? Anyone used any of these? My > >impression is that Subversion is essentially the same architecture as > >CVS; it doesn't have any of the modern features such as proper > >distribution/p2p support. It is however a significant improvement on > >CVS, as Ian has pointed out. > > > >IMHO we should choose a CVS replacement, and use it. Hopefully > >bandwidth > >issues from anonymous checkouts won't be too big a problem; dodo has > >15GB/mo. Personally I am of the opinion that something with proper > >distribution support i.e. not Subversion, would be better because it > >would be easier to adapt to Freenet, and because it would help third > >parties who are on the periphery and therefore don't have CVS write > >access. All the above (and many more) have atomic commits. ArX and > >Darcs > >claim to have good merging. According to [1], Subversion's merging is > >inferior to anything modern. > > > >[1] yet another link, rather old: > >http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/01/29/scm_overview.html > >another more recent comparison: > >http://www.nongnu.org/arx/codecon/codecon.html > >[2] another comparison > >http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/scm.html > > > >Anyone with experience in any of the above? > > > >With most of the above, we can provide a read-only repository via HTTP > >with no extra modules needed, so anonymous checkout isn't > >necessarily a > >problem either. There are also public options such as > >sourcecontrol.net. > >Sourceforge and savannah can do arch (and presumably bazaar) also. > > > >On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > >>http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch > >>http://www.gnuarch.org/arch/arch-overview.html > >> > >>On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 05:27:36PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> > >>>http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-arch/ > >>> > >>>Anyone had any experience? There is already a port to freenet, > >>>and the > >>>guy who wrote it might perhaps be persuaded to update it; if not, we > >>>might, eventually. The description sounds good. > >>> > >>-- > >>Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > >>ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > >> > > > > > > > > > >>_______________________________________________ > >>chat mailing list > >>chat@freenetproject.org > >>Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > >>Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ > >>listinfo/chat > >>Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > > >-- > >Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > >ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > >_______________________________________________ > >chat mailing list > >chat@freenetproject.org > >Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general > >Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/ > >listinfo/chat > >Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
-- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
