Am 01.10.2010 11:38, schrieb Andrew: >> 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. > > Source availability requirements are applicable for all versioning > systems, or only for CVS? The page only mentions CVS, but I would assume that this applies to all other versioning systems as well. I think their point is - source for binary releases must be in FRS. Having it somewhere other than in FRS is not sufficient to meet that requirement.
>> 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. >> > Why we need to switch into other building system now, with SCM > switching? IMHO it's possible to use buildtool with other SCM's - they > also have web-interface. I have no intention of changing either the buildsystem, or the SCM (I thought I made that clear). I was simply responding to emails that suggested that switching would be a good idea. In fact, I thought I was arguing *against* changing the buildsystem and/or SCM at this point, and rather focus on getting Bering uClibc4 "production ready". 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
