Manoj Srivastava dijo [Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 03:26:38PM -0600]: > > IMHO, the use cases are fundamentally different here - dpatch and > > quilt are, in my eyes, mostly geared towards diffs used by packagers, > > not as much by developers. > > Can you qualify why you hold such an opinion? I ask because I > mostly disagree; I see no fundamental difference is > creating/maintaining separate lines of development or added feature > sets, or even bug fixes (because, fundamentally, bug fixes and > behaviour changes are similar in nature; the difference being in the > opinions about the behaviour before the change being inherently > undesirable).
Well, really this thread (which, as you also said, is among the rare interesting and useful threads in our mailing lists nowadays) has shown me what I already know - That I should get more into DVCSs ;-) I won't repeat what Russ already replied to you (as I'm also among those content enough with SVN to push for something more ellaborate)... The only argument I still have is that purpose-specific systems are easier on the casual maintainer to understand and properly use than a complete DVCS with its workflow. For one, I know I'd end up doing a single line of development, not a series of branches to be kept separate. Until I read this thread, that is. > > Most Debian work is, of course, packaging. In the case of devotee, I > > am sure dpatch/quilt are not in a better position than any other > > diffing solution. But for figuring out changesets in Debian packages, > > I ofteh find them to be the right tool. > > Again, you are expressing an opinion, without giving us a hint > as to how you arrived at such a conclusion. Care to share? Extrapolation from what I've experienced is a wonderful, if inexact, tool. -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
