Am 30.09.2010 17:07, schrieb Enrico Weigelt: > Recoursive wget would perform much better. CVS isn't particularily > well suited for such things. Possibly - I don't really want to get into an argument about what SCM works better for whom under what circumstances (I'll leave that discussion to others :-)).
Just in case it got overlooked - we have a (mostly) working setup for creating a buildenv and packages, for storing the sources and for generating the packages page for the homepage including a changelog. We also have the requirement (per Sourceforge terms of use) to provide the sources for a binary release in the FRS (which we currently don't do, since according to the link Mike provided, having those sources in CVS is not sufficient). So, looking for a different SCM, might be interesting (and possibly/probably provide benefits) - but it doesn't address the issue that we're not providing sources for binary releases in FRS. I'm not emotionally attached to buildtool - if we can find something that's better (and find somebody who does the work of porting everything we currently have in buildtool), I see no reason not to switch. Same goes with CVS - I don't really care which SCM the sources are saved in. I'm just not sure that the project has the manpower for replacing buildtool and migrating to a different SCM right now - and for the project, it's probably better, if people work on getting bering-uClibc4 "production ready". But if there's manpower to do both (and overhaul the webpage and docs), that would be great. As always, I don't speak for anybody but myself. Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
