On Friday, 06 July 2007 at 10:47, Bart Braem wrote: > On Thursday 05 July 2007 19:46, Eddie Kohler wrote: > > I would like to move away from Click's current anonymous CVS based > > development model to a distributed source control system. This would > > let people maintain public branches of their own. I am leaning towards > > "git", the tool originally developed for Linux. > > > > http://git.or.cz/ > > > > Any complaints or comments? Speak now! > > Hi Eddie, > > Can I ask why you want a distributed system? I really like the idea > of moving away from CVS, the advantages of using it are starting to > fade quickly, compared to other solutions available today. But I > don't like the idea of using a distributed system. Of course the > advantage is that separate people can use their own > repositories. But then the integration with the Click "core" will > get harder when API changes are made. Repository owners will have to > indicate compatible Click versions, I'd think.
Nothing requires this. DVCS is a superset of VCS, and you can continue to use it in a centralized way, with one master repository at an official location. Even when used this way, a DVCS lets you do cool things like offline commits, and diff/patch/log/annotate etc are much faster. And you'd still get big improvements in branch merging, which is no fun in subversion. > But I might be too old-fashioned here, does anyone have experience with > synchronization of source repositories? Does this work, is it hard to keep up > with the core repository? since it's so much easier to move code across branches, I'd say it should be a lot easier. And if you just want to track the official repository, that's nearly automatic. Just pull and merge (again, merge is not the scary operation it is in subversion). > Currently for some internal projects we are using SVN and combined with > TortoiseSVN even newbies can perfectly use it. But perhaps access permissions > will be harder to manage than in distributed systems. > > A second remark: please consider something more usable than git. To me it > seemed really hard to use, last time I tried to use it. > I do not know whether mercurial or svk or ... are more userfriendly, but I > feel that we should avoid building a barrier for people to use the latest and > greatest Click release. The mercurial interface looks very similar to subversion. You have a couple more operations (pull, push, merge), but it should be very easy to adapt to.
pgpwpVxBJEQCB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ click mailing list [email protected] https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
