Darren J Moffat wrote: > Roland Mainz wrote: > > AFAIK OpenSolaris tries to support two SCMs, Mercurial and Subversion, > > right ? IMO both should be supported for all OpenSolaris repositories... > > Yes for OpenSolaris.org the site. No for all projects/consolidations. > Each project/consolidation has to pick one that is the master (ie the > one that can be written to by commiters). If you choose to bridge away > from the master into another SCM don't expect to be able to integrate > into the master without switching to the other. > > This was done because some consolidations have a very strong need for a > distributed SCM. Mercurial was the choice for those. The ON > consolidation is one that really needs a distributed SCM.
Why does the "strong need" require to disallow any alternatives from being used ? And what about tools like "webrev" - should they only support Mercurial (which would be bad since these tools are expected to be used for review in other consolidations, too - in that case you develop on Subvesion and have to migrate the whole tree to Mercurial just to run "webrev") ? > I don't believe that one should expect that the ON project/consolidation > team should/will support both Mercurial and Subversion, if they do one > of them has to be a read-only clone and for ON that means Subversion. IMO this is not a good idea unless _lots_ of tools get Mercurial support (which AFAIK won't happen since Mercurial is a very very rare SCM and commercial products will likely demand lots of $$$$ for adding such a feature). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
