[gentoo-user] Portage Storage using SVN

2006-07-23 Thread Trenton Adams
Hi guys, I proposed this awhile back, and got shot down. At the time, the arguments for using SVN for portage storage were pretty shallow, and someone was able to easily shoot them down. I believe I have come up with better reasoning for using SVN. Someone may still shoot them down, but hey,

Re: [gentoo-user] Portage Storage using SVN

2006-07-23 Thread Hans-Werner Hilse
Hi, On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 02:42:43 -0600 Trenton Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I proposed this awhile back, and got shot down. At the time, the arguments for using SVN for portage storage were pretty shallow, and someone was able to easily shoot them down. I believe I have come up with

Re: [gentoo-user] Portage Storage using SVN

2006-07-23 Thread Trenton Adams
On 7/23/06, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 02:42:43 -0600, Trenton Adams wrote: Let's say openldap had a problem. So, we decide to mask the latest version of openldap, in an effort to roll back to the version that was working. Well, we find out that openldap

Re: [gentoo-user] Portage Storage using SVN

2006-07-23 Thread Trenton Adams
On 7/23/06, Hans-Werner Hilse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 02:42:43 -0600 Trenton Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I proposed this awhile back, and got shot down. At the time, the arguments for using SVN for portage storage were pretty shallow, and someone was able to

Re: [gentoo-user] Portage Storage using SVN

2006-07-23 Thread Hemmann, Volker Armin
On Sunday 23 July 2006 10:42, Trenton Adams wrote: Hi guys, I proposed this awhile back, and got shot down. At the time, the arguments for using SVN for portage storage were pretty shallow, and someone was able to easily shoot them down. I believe I have come up with better reasoning for