Robert Haas wrote:
The arguments that were put forward for switching to git all had to do
with managing patches against HEAD. AFAIK hardly anyone but the core
committers deals with back-patching at all, and so a structure like this
isn't going to affect anyone else --- you'd just ignore the back-branch
directory subtrees in your checkout.
If we're going to do that let's just keep using CVS. I would consider
a repository organized that way to be completely unusable; without
doing anything the system we have now is better than that.
The only reason Tom sees a single line history is because he uses an
addon tool for CVS called cvs2cl: see <http://www.red-bean.com/cvs2cl/>.
It's not part of CVS, and I'm not sure how many others use it. I sure
don't. It's written in Perl, and we have one or two tolerably competent
Perl programmers around, so maybe we could produce a git equivalent?
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
