Adam Turoff wrote:
*: Sarathy tells me that Perforce sucks at maintaining thousands of
anonymous checkouts, while CVS doesn't mind at all. This is a perfect
reason to use anon CVS vs. Perforce, but does not require that Perforce be
ditched in favor of CVS, only that an anon CVS gateway be
Adam Turoff wrote:
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:14:17AM -0400, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
The decisions should be based on technical merit and general availability.
I would include "available under a free software license" as part of the
definition of "general
Bennett,
Perforce is a better source code control system than the source
alternatives, and certainly better for the task we face than CVS.
You're certainly not forced to use it. You can, if you rather, grab
snapshot archives, rsync from the repository directory, or even grab a copy
of the
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:31:37PM -0400, Bennett Todd wrote:
2000-09-07-17:11:50 Dan Sugalski:
That's certainly possible, but since the reason we're gathered here
together working on trying to launch perl6 is a collective belief
that perl5 has become unmaintainable for further development,
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:49:36PM -0400, Peter Allen wrote:
They have a catchy slogan for it. They call it the
test -- code -- design
development cycle.
That sounds bad. I've heard about this style. Code now, refactor
later. Its supposed to avoid the need for sweeping
Michael G Schwern writes:
There's one solution, now that we have a nifty source control stuff.
Branch like mad! Feature creep should be discouraged, but if a group
wants to go off and work on something which isn't going to make it
into the next release they can branch and play.
That
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
[...]
Also, what if people want to learn how the source system works on their own,
and experiment with it? With only 100-user license, we are pretty tight as
to who can do that. There are probably more than 100 people on the various
perl6 mailing
At 09:29 AM 9/4/00 -0400, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
the perl-qa people have some code they need to manage in a repository of
some kind. For now I have directed them to SourceForge, but I have a 100
users license for perforce I got for perl, so if we can get a quick
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I don't think we should make decisions about the software we use for
development based on political views.
While I do have many political views regarding free software, this is an
issue of ethical views. It against my personal ethics to use proprietary
software.
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I picture the design process ending with a breakdown into modules, and
then a codification of the interfaces between the modules. Then we stub
the modules, get something that passes the compiler. Now we turn to
implementation, and begin filling
Russ Allbery writes:
I also think this may well be a good place to apply one of the ideas of XP
(Extreme Programming, a fairly flexible small-group software design
methodology), namely to write test cases *first* in many cases before
writing the code, and to seriously consider trying to write
11 matches
Mail list logo
