Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

Hi Folks, I've put up the following TWiki page: http://www.neville-neil.com/twiki/bin/view/Freebsd/DevelopmentProcess as a scribbling area for a possible set of rules/practices that we can use to address the issues raised in this discussion. For those not familiar with TWiki who want t

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

"M. Warner Losh" wrote: > That's the $64k question. Our current worst case is the "rock > tumbler" school of management. You put everybody together in one big > hopper and spin. This knockes the rough edges off people. However, > it doesn't take into account differing "hardness" of the materia

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "George V. Neville-Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : So, how do we get our attitudes adjusted before hitting a wall, : as many companies I've worked for did? It comes back to agreeing : on a process by which we work. We have one now, it may not all :

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "George V. Neville-Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : > There are only only 8 core team members, unless you mean something : > different by "core" here than [EMAIL PROTECTED] : : I guess I was going based on the meeting I attended back at BSD Con. The

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "George V. Neville-Neil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : The problem here is process. The FreeBSD project now has more than : 12 core members and more than 12 committers. With any number larger : than 12 it is VERY HARD to reach consensus on anything. W

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : > I meant "lock" in the sense of expecting no one to make any major : > changes in the same area of code. I seem to remember you asking for : > such a "lock" (to use the term loosely) in July, and the KSE work

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

In message: Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : I think the main issue here is how long the real repository can be : "locked" while waiting for some change to show up. If work can : keep going into the main repository, then what does

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

At 6:55 PM -0800 2/26/02, Julian Elischer wrote: > > (1) The timeout begins when contention occurs, of the lock has been >> declared. This means that if you seriously intend to do some work, >> you can say "I'm going to do the work", but you don't risk losing the >> lock until som

Re: Discussion of guidelines for additional version controlmechanisms (fwd)

At 4:53 PM -0500 2/26/02, Robert Watson wrote: >The purpose of this message is to initiate a serious discussion >of what guidelines might be put in place to help facilitate the >use of additional version control mechanisms [...]. I've mixed >in some suggested things to think about as possible ans