Michael Raskin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 First of all, I have no objections against mtn but I have some objections against your reasons.
> What DVCS is used for? I see a few options feature-wise: > > 3) Full project history. What, when and where was committed. Maybe with > some additional security on top of this. Not storing branch name is an issue and Eelco should decide whether we need this feature. I haven't tried to use any DVCS system that stores this info, so I have no experience whether it is really usefull. Could you please provide any concrete usecase? > 4) Extra information for ease of searching interesting places in > history. For example, some people put BugID into commit messages. Easy to do with git. I'd add the following: 5) Possibility to comment old commits (e.g., "bug #n was introduced here"). This is a weak side of git (btw, can we make git clone git-notes?). > Now, there are some properties: > > 5) Reliability w.r.t. user actions. (Dangerous things are obvious) Do you write a message "against git", or "what do we need"? Please, list some dangerous things here. > 7) Having any architecture behind the tool Explain in more details, please. "Git *obviously* has no architecture" is not a reason. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
