On Tuesday 06 March 2007, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > Marcel Siegert schrieb: > > On Tuesday 06 March 2007, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > >> Marcel Siegert schrieb: > >>> On Tuesday 06 March 2007, Denis Oliver Kropp wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> someone here with some tips for moving to git? > >>>> > >>>> Otherwise, I'll just do the usual apt-get + RTFM. > >>>> > >>> > >>> hi denis, > >>> > >>> what do you want to move to git? > >>> directfb and its modules, coprojects? > >> Yes, all of them. > >> > > > > args, > > > > why are you planning to do so? > > > > swimming with the hype? > > > > or is cvs too unuseable? > > > > if that is the point, i would recommend subversion. > > cvs == svn > > I like distributed repositories. At the moment I'm having > different CVS repositories for different projects, each > having its own DirectFB module. Merging between them is > always done manually with cvs diff and patch etc. > > How would svn solve that? >
cvs!=svn svn has advantages e.g. like moving files & history.... i dont like them, haven't worked that much with git but i do know mercurial and that one sucks. also for a developer imho it is not to known all commands and different workflows of all those scm's. svn is nearly the same syntax as cvs, so also user could step over without any rejections, just taking the advantages. on linuxtv.org each modification (to prevent too much conflicts) should be in a seperate repository. so you have to have one repo e.g. where you develop new things, one for clean to pull from, and if like you have, loads of repos must be pulled, merged, ect. imho that is much more work. why do you have the need of those different distributed repos? (c)opyrighted maybe nda stuff? marcel _______________________________________________ directfb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev
