Paul Jackson wrote:
David wrote:
My list would be:
ext2, ext3, NFS, and Windows' NTFS (stupid short filenames,
case-insensitive/case-preserving).
I'm no mind reader, but I'd bet a pretty penny that what you have in
mind and what Linus has in mind have no overlaps in their solution sets.
Sadly, I lack the mind reading ability as well.
Our goals are, I suspect, somewhat different.
Linus wants to build a tool that meets his specific needs
(managing kernel development), and he has particular requirements
(such as fast simple merging when working at large scales).
In contrast, I'm hoping for a more
general OSS/FS SCM tool that many others can use as well.
But I think there's heavy overlap in the solution space.
The Linux kernel project is, to my knowledge, the largest
project using a truly distributed SCM process.
Anyone else who is considering a distributed SCM process
would at _least_ want to think about how the Linux kernel
project works, and if they're doing so, they
might also want to reuse the development tools.
I'm just taking a peek, and
looking for situations where a design decision is irrelevant
for his purposes, but a particular direction would be of
particular help to other projects. I'm more worried about the
storage format; if the code doesn't support some particular
feature but it could be added later without great pain, no big deal.
If something would imply a complete rewrite, that's undesirable.
--- David A. Wheeler
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
