On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Myk Melez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So I think we should add Mercurial to the site. But this would not preclude adding Subversion as well at some point if resources became available to deploy and maintain it.
Here's my perspective: * The familiarity of Subversion is a big plus for me, although I will obviously have to learn Mercurial anyway for Mozilla 2.x work. * Not having Mercurial as part of the current MozillaBuild package hurts on Windows. A lot. Guess what my primary platform is... * What I use mozdev for, with Verbosio, is quite different than almost everyone else. Most people here build extensions. I'm building a whole app, with a modified XULRunner base. So what I say here may not be relevant to everyone else's situations. :-) * If Mozilla 1.9.x will also have a constantly-maintained Mercurial repository, then it might actually be better for me to use Mercurial directly, although I'm not sure mozdev would appreciate me placing the whole Mozilla source there... alternatively, I can always maintain a patch set, and make checking out of Moz1.9 part of the checkout process. (This alternate is how I was approaching my project on the assumption of SVN.) * I freaking hate CVS now. Whatever the community decides, I think the decision should be made quickly, and implemented quickly. * By "deprecating CVS", I assume we mean new projects should not be instituted on CVS unless the project owner explicitly requests it. I'd be in favor of that. CVS is just too much pain compared to more modern systems. -- "The first step in confirming there is a bug in someone else's work is confirming there are no bugs in your own." -- Alexander J. Vincent, June 30, 2001
_______________________________________________ Project_owners mailing list [email protected] https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
