Le 31/07/2012 17:38, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 7/31/12 2:24 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 23:40 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
[…]
Walter and I will dedicate time after 2.060 to improving the process.
"Improve" implies tinkering at the edges. This situation requires a
"change" or perhaps "revolution". I suggest just switching to a
ready-made DVCS / Git process that is known to work, and is well
documented, rather than trying to craft a new one based on CVCS /
Subversion / CVS history.
You can't suggest a revolution - only carry it through. But I'm a bit
confused. We already use git, and the idea is to use it better. What's
the thing with subversion etc? Where's the revolution?
That would result in a fork. Is that really what we want/need ?
To be honest there is never a reason to freeze a repository, even with
Subversion, and definitely not with Git, Mercurial and Bazaar.
Agreed. But that means we'd need to use branching and tagging better,
not to "revolutionize" things.
We actually have to « reverse » the way thing are done. You can't go to
the other side of a gap in 2 steps. We face a change that cannot be
gradually adopted.
