Thomas Vander Stichele wrote: >Hi, > > > > >> I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much >>discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion. >>But I keep thinking that, although Subversion is much better than CVS, >>maybe we would benefit more from a distributed version control system, >>like mercurial, bzr, git, monotone, etc. >> >> > >One of the drawbacks of these distributed version control systems is >precisely the fact that it makes it very easy to keep private "branches" >around. > >All things equal, it would work against the goal of trying to make sure >development happens in public. > >That's probably a very good reason why subversion may be the best choice >for GNOME at this point. > > We've already got people maintaining private branches while we're still on CVS (e.g. the panel menu changes being discussed in this very thread).
>From my point of view, one of the major benefits of the various distributed revision control systems is better _merging_ rather than better _branching_. Given that we've already got people maintaining off-mainline branches, wouldn't it make sense to use a system that makes it easier to pull the good changes back to the mainline? Subversion doesn't seem to bring us any closer to doing that. James. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
