Jan Holesovsky wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Tuesday 24 April 2007 15:48, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
Some of the clones might be public, eg. ooo-build.
if people agree on a push back, only some of the clones needs to be
public, if this should be a pull back public access gets a problem.
so right now it is no problem to access a cws which has not been
integrated yet and can e.g. do something like tinderbox builds on it.
The other way round hides all development behind corperate firewalls. Is
this something we really want to do ?
I'm not sure that I understand you... CWS is not visible until the developer
does 'cvs commit', the git branch is not visible until the developer does
'git push' to the public repository. What is the difference?
In CVS it is just one step to publish: "cvs commit", if I understand git
right, this is two step process: "commit and push", I'm just wondering
how much "delayed code drop" events we will get with this process.
Esspecially if you think of some staggered development practices.
Regards,
Jan
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
