I really likes the distributed model that git provide. As I understood none of the cvs or svn do that. I wanted to say that FLTK needs to open door for more people to engage .. I really likes having other branches and other directories which could be belong to FLTK core that provides more and more widgets.
I think git has the security for the code against corruption and authentication sins it use sha1. This is missing in the other options. People may code some widgets, they have a home site for some months or years, then everything vanish since the home site goes down... Having the files in the core of FLTK under for ex. "other widgets" could very much be a good help for fltk users. anyway, you may disagree with me, but fltk needs to make it easier to contribute.. I like FLTK and I did always .. I wish the fltk developer all the best , and thanks for your works .. Regards, > On Dec 28, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Mariwan wrote: > > HI, > > As I read and heard, how difficult developer's life could be when you = > use SVN or CVS "you may heard that also from Linus Torsvald". I have = > never used SVN and I have no good idea about it but I am using "newbies" = > git and I think it works good. > > My question is : Don't you (FLTK developers) think that using Git = > could solve many problems for you as FLTK, FLTK manager and developers = > could have? > > AFAIK, we have no problems with SVN per-se. GIT is just another version = > control system with a particular feature set, and Linus obviously has a = > vested interest in promoting it, but FLTK doesn't require that feature = > set. Moreover, if individual FLTK developers want to do = > remote/offline/distributed development with GIT they can already do so = > against the current SVN repository using the SVN support included with = > GIT... > > _____________ > Michael Sweet > _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list fltk-dev@easysw.com http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
