On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 04:35 +0000, John Spackman wrote: [ . . . ] > I am prepared to upgrade Jelly to Maven2 (not that I know much about what > that involves, yet) and to improve the website but I have to be confident > that the changes will happen quickly and easily, and that the project will > not be retired. Please don't get me wrong - I am very grateful for your > offer to apply patches etc sent via JIRA but I am cautious as I think of the > potential extra work that would entail and how much simpler it would be if I > could just issue an SVN commit. [ . . . ]
Forgive me for butting in on a conversation but . . . Isn't this whole Subversion centralism problem solved by using a DVCS such as Bazaar, or Git -- and soon, I gather, Mercurial. Bazaar and Git can both be used as Subversion clients, using the bzr-svn and git-svn plugins respectively -- and I believe Mercurial will getting equivalent capability in the future. A Bazaar branch and a Git repository carry the entire history, can be rebased, can be used to create patches, and indeed you can commit to a Subversion repository direct from a branch or repository. For a couple of my projects, Codehaus is the host so the central mainline is a Subversion repository. However most work is done using Bazaar or Git since people do not need an account to be able to work using a full VCS. Using a DVCS makes working on a FOSS project truly open. -- Russel. ==================================================== Dr Russel Winder Partner Concertant LLP t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203 41 Buckmaster Road, f: +44 8700 516 084 London SW11 1EN, UK. m: +44 7770 465 077
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
