Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > Phil Endecott schrieb: > >> I like distributed repositories. At the moment I'm having > >> different CVS repositories for different projects, each > >> having its own DirectFB module. Merging between them is > >> always done manually with cvs diff and patch etc. > >> > >> How would svn solve that? > > > > The answer is "with svn:externals". Although I use subversion I do > > understand that there are situations where git is more suitable. The > > obvious case is when you have large numbers of developers working very > > independently. I don't know if that applies to you. But in the case > > that you describe, I have to ask, why does each of your projects have > > its own copy of DirectFB? Personally, I would have a single svn > > repository for DirectFB. Then in each of the other projects, use an > > svn:externals "symlink" to point to it. When you check out the project, > > you'll get a copy of DirectFB automatically.
I use svn at work, and svn:externals doesn't what Dok wants -- it's just a means to check out or update multiple trees with one command (e.g. you could set up a "dfb-all" directory and set the svn:externals property to check out DirectFB, FusionSound, SaWMan, ... in one go). The downside is that svn does no sufficient error checking, so you usually don't notice right away if something wnet wrong. svn:externals is similar to cvs modules (the CVSROOT/modules file). > Is it possible to commit to the local copy and have your local history? No. > How would you merge back your changes to the mainline? svn handles merges only within one repository. svk extends svn with distributed features, but when I tested it last year it was incredibly slow and thus unusable. (I tried to create a clone of the svk repo using svk and killed it after one hour.) Regards, Johannes _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
