Dear Mark,
I encourage all to keep their minds open.
Good:-)
My 0.02 EUR (or even less) on the recurrent SCM flame war on the list.
ISTM that a decentralized or distributed SCM for PostgreSQL would be a bad
move, however great it would be at branching and merging. For me it is a
philosophy question: if PGSQL is a "common work", then everything should
be open and shared, and a centralized systems make sense to embodied this.
Even if one can publish one's branch easily with GIT, it's not the same,
because it is still a personnal branch somehow.
From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
git
n 1: a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible;
"only a rotter would do that"; "kill the rat"; "throw the
bum out"; "you cowardly little pukes!"; "the British call a
contemptible person a `git'" [syn: {rotter}, {dirty dog},
{rat}, {skunk}, {stinker}, {stinkpot}, {bum}, {puke},
{crumb}, {lowlife}, {scum bag}, {so-and-so}, {git}]
I'm not sure I would be proud to use such a stupidly named tool for a
"common work". I really do not share Linus humor, and apparent contempt
for other people. GIT implements "I want to chose whom I work with, and
don't care about the others, and don't ever want to have to look at their
ugly patches", or at least it is what I understood from his talk at Google
last year. Would this be the future spirit of PG devel? I hope not.
--
Fabien.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
