Twylite wrote: > I'm afraid I simply don't understand. You set it up, it runs. You make > backups using a cron script or the Task Scheduler. What more is there > to administrating SVN?
If I recall correctly, setup was very non-trivial, and you have to give SSH keys to anyone who wants to contribute, so that's more work too. I find it that rarely does software run without any need for maintenance. > When you clone A to B you have not branched anything. You have created > a copy of the repository. That is all. Maybe in fossil. But you are trying to argue that there is a problem with other distributed SCMs. In those SCMs you criticize, the problem you are describing does not exist. They *are* branches in Darcs, Git, Hg and Bazaar (the Bazaar list just confirmed this). Most of these tools do support "light-weight branches" (Hg doesn't) but that's certainly not the default behaviour. > The copy knows where it was copied from, so that it will automatically > talk to the original repository when you try to push or pull. In other SCMs, every branch knows where you pushed or pulled from last time. If you push somewhere else, the next time you type "push" without a parameter they'll push to that other place. > That > alternative is that whenever you push or pull you must provide the > path/URL of the other repository (which you don't need to do with git, > hg, bazaar, fossil, etc. precisely because it makes this note that B is > copied from A). Darcs, Hg, Bazaar and Git do nothing of the sort. They just remember where you pushed or pulled form next and save you typing. But that doesn't make the current branch a dependency on any other branch. > Without making any changes to A or B, you can delete A, and then B will > not be able to push/pull without you telling it where to find a new > parent repository. In Darcs, Hg, Bazaar and Git, the branch "A" is not a "parent" unless you went out of your way to make a "light-weight" branch. I didn't even know until today that Darcs supported light-weight branches. > Branching cannot happen until you actually commit a change into a > repository. That's the fossil view. But if you are going to criticize other SCMs, you need to learn how they view branching. What you said is not true for other SCMs. Daniel. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
