I think it's important to have "fallback" mode, when there is no gih/hg or whatever.
I now wonder if it's right way to go... to have the cherokee.conf versioned "outside" admin is also easy, so I'm not sure about that integration again. 01-02-2012 18:58 użytkownik "Alvaro Lopez Ortega" <[email protected]> napisał: > > On 02/01/2012 10:32 AM, Jędrzej Nowak wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Alvaro Lopez Ortega<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > It's an interesting idea. It'd vote +1 as long as we managed to implement it >>> > as a weak dependency (this is, it'd also work if you did not have git >>> > installed). >> >> Then I need to change my opinion about that idea. But dependency less >> system like that is a good idea I think. Maybe the best will be to >> have something like abstract layer on top of it - then when no git / >> hg use kind off 'fallback mode' ? > > > It's completely up to us how complex we want it to be. The question, though, is whether it'd worth supporting more than a single version control system.
_______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
