On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 11:34 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > This is ALL because the current version control system relies on the final > arbiter being a single directory on a single machine: cvs.gnucash.org.
No, it's not. It's because you're trying to extricate a lot of really central code from a large, actively-developing codebase that everyone else wants to remain static/stable, and has a different goal for, by copying-and-pasting large amounts of code. > I need to be able to make smaller commits that change fewer files in one go, > that require less time building pointless trees and which are available for > *inspection* by others WITHOUT necessarily having to be IN their build. Yes, indeed. > That is a decentralised model - there is no single arbiter, no single source. > It's almost like a branch per developer. So maybe we need to branch the code for this effort, as has been proposed? I just don't see a requirement for a decentralized source-control system, here, though. ...jsled -- http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel