On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 21:06:45 +0000 Brian Drummond <[email protected]> wrote: > The usual Mercurial approach to "big picture" changes is to clone the > entire repo (see www.hginit.com, last chapter) essentially forking the > project for the separate development. It's safer (there is no danger > op polluting the main repo) and the changes can later be merged back > into the trunk (or a separate new repo if preferred) >
A *skunkworks* type of project fork can be an attractive option. > I'm not yet clear how that plays with Sourceforge but the "fork" > button appears to work along these lines (making you a repo under > your account) where you can play, and it does allow merge requests > back to the original (which an admin here would have to perform!) > It might be more interesting if each member of a small R&D team were to host a node of a distributed [fossil](www.fossil-scm.org) repository and communicate through conventional email [Cc: R&D-group], fossil-tickets, and fossil-wiki.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
