Martin Hollmichel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A switch to DSCM is the bigger and a promising step: enhancements of
> our development model and style look possible...
>
Right - generally, a distributed approach fits the multi-tier,
decentralised world of OOo much better. Besides that, having the full
repository on my local disk just rocks, in terms of speed, latency,
and what I can do with simple scripts.
Taking the tree graph from kendy's presentation (the one with the
bubbles labelled OOo master, StarOffice, OOBuild etc.), this model
makes line-by-line differentiation from the master repository
('vanilla' OOo) straight forward - at least for StarOffice, we've not
been able to do that in the past, the granularity for differentiation
was on module level.
> I guess some of you may think that with a transition from CVS to
> subversion this discussion might be dead, but I definitely don't
> think so. The opportunities we have with a modern SCM are to much to
> get ignored but we need some time for such thought which I don't
> want to let get passed by by sitting on our old CVS.
>
Indeed, I'm a bit concerned that moving to subversion will make us
suffer from the 'good enough' syndrome. But I can clearly live with
that, if we agree that it's an interim solution (and given that svn
tooling for CWS is almost done - if we need to invest half a year to
have that running, we could as well move to DSCM).
Just my 2 cents,
-- Thorsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
