Re: [gentoo-dev] DB vs SCM (was Re: [RFC] Some sync control)

2007-01-27 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Steve Long wrote: > I'm thinking in any case that a db app can save old revisions or use a svn > backend. I'm looking at this from a workflow perspective, in terms > especially of the security issue around giving commit access to the whole > tree. If the individual maintainer only has permission

Re: [gentoo-dev] DB vs SCM (was Re: [RFC] Some sync control)

2007-01-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 13:11:07 + Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Since this is a different question which got buried in the other > discussion, I appreciate it should be a new thread: > > I'm a bit confused about all the portage tree stuff. There's just > under 25,000 ebuilds

Re: [gentoo-dev] DB vs SCM (was Re: [RFC] Some sync control)

2007-01-27 Thread Petteri Räty
Steve Long wrote: > Hi, > > Please note, I'm not talking about applications like portage or pkgcore, > just the ebuild text files, which I understand have one maintainer? > Many ebuilds are in maintained by a bunch of people via herds. > > I appreciate that source control is needed to maintain f

[gentoo-dev] DB vs SCM (was Re: [RFC] Some sync control)

2007-01-27 Thread Steve Long
Hi, Since this is a different question which got buried in the other discussion, I appreciate it should be a new thread: I'm a bit confused about all the portage tree stuff. There's just under 25,000 ebuilds, which are maintained by about 100 devs (not sure of exact number, taken from a forum p