dukeofgaming wrote:
I know it will be a while until any choice of DVCS is adopted by PHP,
but I'll be creating an RFC as soon as I can edit the wiki (I can edit
the rfc namespace but cannot edit the rfc page itself to add the entry)
so that we can start making note of the current challenges and c
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> dukeofgaming wrote:
>
>>hggit + Mercurial Eclipse + Eclipse means I could not care less what
>>the target is EXCEPT that one can't write a project that is JUST the
>>set of sub-modules that you want to pull together. IDEALLY - both
dukeofgaming wrote:
hggit + Mercurial Eclipse + Eclipse means I could not care less what
the target is EXCEPT that one can't write a project that is JUST the
set of sub-modules that you want to pull together. IDEALLY - both
GIT and HG would just pull stuff from which ever is provi
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Drak wrote:
>
>>At the current time I think that PHP would need to restructure how
>>it is packaged up to provide a single repo in both HG or GIT.
>>Keeping SVN ( I'd still prefer CVS here it works BETTER as a master
>>for DVCS
Drak wrote:
At the current time I think that PHP would need to restructure how
it is packaged up to provide a single repo in both HG or GIT.
Keeping SVN ( I'd still prefer CVS here it works BETTER as a master
for DVCS! ) as the master from which we CAN currently sync using HG
Hi Lester,
AFAIK both mercurial and git support sub-repositories nicely now:
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Subrepository
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-submodule.html
Regarding the graphical tools, I don't use them that much, but I see your
point. Personally, I just occa
On 1 June 2011 12:41, Lester Caine wrote:
> At the current time I think that PHP would need to restructure how it is
> packaged up to provide a single repo in both HG or GIT. Keeping SVN ( I'd
> still prefer CVS here it works BETTER as a master for DVCS! ) as the master
> from which we CAN curren
dukeofgaming wrote:
I thought it might be interesting for all to read some feedback I got
from some questions I made to the Joomla community, specifically, the
guys and gals that have been implementing the decoupling of the Joomla
framework: the Joomla Platform.
They currently still use svn offi
Hi,
I thought it might be interesting for all to read some feedback I got from
some questions I made to the Joomla community, specifically, the guys and
gals that have been implementing the decoupling of the Joomla framework: the
Joomla Platform.
They currently still use svn officially but they h
dukeofgaming wrote:
http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/35074/im-a-subversion-geek-why-i-should-consider-or-not-consider-mercurial-or-git-or/35080#35080
So, I don't want to make debate here of wether centralized is better than
distributed (because the point is moot), but I think its n
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Ben Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I realise that at least for now, PHP is sticking with SVN. No problems.
>
> However...I find it much easier to work in Mercurial to put together
> patches, find bugs, etc.. And in fact, I find SVN really awkward--I was
> on the verge of
I think I agree with all that.
My only thought so far about the load issue is that the load is less the fewer
changesets have to be queried each 'poll', so perhaps it would be good to have a
commit hook in SVN that sends a quick request (without even waiting for a reply)
to Hg/Git scripts that
Hi Ben, I'm sorry I did a wrong remark there, but I see you saw what I
meant.
The nice thing about open source projects is that communities develop
naturally around them, it becomes an ecosystem, everything tends to lean
towards balance, when a change is intended to be made it should be allowed
to
On 28 April 2011 08:52, dukeofgaming wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not a frequent poster in the list but I thought I'd really should give
> my 1 cent here when I saw "popular" being an argument for using DVCSs, its
> not, and its neither fashion nor cargo cult, it is just a plain eye opener
> experience o
Just for the recordI didn't say popularity was a reason to use a DVCS. I said
the popularity of DVCSes might cause server strain (if a lot of people want to
convert the public SVN repo to a distributed one, downloading all the changes in
the repo, which SVN really wasn't designed for, that w
Hi,
I'm not a frequent poster in the list but I thought I'd really should give
my 1 cent here when I saw "popular" being an argument for using DVCSs, its
not, and its neither fashion nor cargo cult, it is just a plain eye opener
experience of how neither SVN or CVS are the base of all versioning (
On 04/27/2011 07:40 PM, Drak wrote:
On 28 April 2011 07:55, Ben Schmidt wrote:
I realise that at least for now, PHP is sticking with SVN. No problems.
I realise this is not the topic of discussion but I have to say, that
overall, a switch to DVCS would make a huge difference to PHP developm
On 28 April 2011 07:55, Ben Schmidt wrote:
> I realise that at least for now, PHP is sticking with SVN. No problems.
>
I realise this is not the topic of discussion but I have to say, that
overall, a switch to DVCS would make a huge difference to PHP development
life cycles. Git for one, makes
On 04/27/2011 07:10 PM, Ben Schmidt wrote:
However, it
may result in a lower server load if PHP can provide a mirror somewhere,
updated by a commit hook or daily cron job or something, rather than me
(and potentially many others, as DVCSes become even more popular)
accessing SVN directly.
The s
Hi!
I realise that at least for now, PHP is sticking with SVN. No problems.
However...I find it much easier to work in Mercurial to put together
patches, find bugs, etc.. And in fact, I find SVN really awkward--I was
on the verge of switching back to CVS when DVCSes such as Mercurial and
Git bec
20 matches
Mail list logo
