Wehn we are discussing $VCS to manage packages it is really about the
tools associated with them.
In git that's topgit + git-buildpackage. In hg that MQ + recently
restarted hg+buildpackage. And the famous pristine-tar.
It is important (for me at least) to still be able to generate debdiff
and be
2009/12/17 Adrian Perez :
> Your point is accurate.
> But you might agree that work was accomplished by several people, and
> not a single person. No need to tell us that you need a Git-enable infra
> to compare with, when you know that can't be accomplished without the
> community support as has t
Seems that Gnome and Fedora are a little bit more conscious than us in
the matter, no spam but check:
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Fedora-Will-Make-the-Leap-to-Package-Source-Control-System-Git
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 12:47 -0600, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:40 A
2009/12/18 Shentino :
> Considering that ship has already sailed a long time ago, I don't think its
> wise to waste lumber on another ship when it is already needed elsewhere.
> If the bzr galleon runs aground or hits an iceberg in the future, however,
> things may change.
> Not being a developer m
Considering that ship has already sailed a long time ago, I don't think its
wise to waste lumber on another ship when it is already needed elsewhere.
If the bzr galleon runs aground or hits an iceberg in the future, however,
things may change.
Not being a developer myself I'm not aware of bzr's s
Jordan Mantha [2009-12-17 13:15 -0500]:
> I would suggest that Ubuntu uses bzr primarily because Canonical
> created bzr and not because it was far and away the greatest DVCS
> out there at the time.
But it was! Ever tried to use tla? It was almost as complicated as git
(SCNR), slow, and far from
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 11:59 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
>
>> But you might agree that work was accomplished by several people, and
>> not a single person. No need to tell us that you need a Git-enable infra
>> to compare with, when you
Lets be very clear here: the choice between git / bzr / hg in
comparison to the tasks developers perform approach 0 relevance.
Typing "bzr commit" vs. "git commit" does not matter to anyone when we
are working on thousands of lines of source and intricate packaging.
Launchpad has been built around
Those were the layers I was talking about, many pitfalls. Honestly, I'd
just use bzr (and a good moment to say I've used it and use it
ocasionally), instead of such a layer.
Also I pointed you to an example, git.debian.org, and they have pointed
you to other more important: upstream.
As I said I
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 10:55 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
>
>> I think Git is better suited than Bzr for the job, and I don't make to
>> make it personal.
>>
> If you think Git is better suited, please demonstrate it by building up
> an e
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 04:40:19PM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Right now, that vote would be:
>
> ( ) continue using the existing apt-get source infrastructure, and
> contribute by sending debdiffs around; merge from Debian by hand,
> etc.
>
What do you mean "by hand"?
I've al
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 11:59 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
> But you might agree that work was accomplished by several people, and
> not a single person. No need to tell us that you need a Git-enable infra
> to compare with, when you know that can't be accomplished without the
> community support as h
Your point is accurate.
But you might agree that work was accomplished by several people, and
not a single person. No need to tell us that you need a Git-enable infra
to compare with, when you know that can't be accomplished without the
community support as has the bzr one evolved from both canoni
Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2009, 10:55 -0500 schrieb Adrian Perez:
> Exactly my point. +1.
> I think Git is better suited than Bzr for the job, and I don't make to
> make it personal.
The speed of Bzr was increased. Today I see no difference between Git
and Bzr regarding speed. You should do some
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 08:23 -0800, Shentino wrote:
> My first move, if I were to make it, would be to put in support for
> competing SCMs and let the package maintainers choose for themselves
> if they wanted to switch out of bzr or not.
>
Anybody in this community is welcome to do that. But, as
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 10:55 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
> I think Git is better suited than Bzr for the job, and I don't make to
> make it personal.
>
If you think Git is better suited, please demonstrate it by building up
an equivalent infrastructure that has been built up around bzr, so fair
si
First off, apologies if being a non-developer posting here is...not kosher,
or whatnot.
Personally, I think that allowing variety of a sort in the actual repos
would allow more freedom for the developers to work with what they are most
comfortable with. Considering the wide variety of packages th
Exactly my point. +1.
I think Git is better suited than Bzr for the job, and I don't make to
make it personal.
It's true that there's an infrastructure set up, but I think the idea of
voting is letting the community decide for itself, and don't impose us a
tool which might not be the preferred ch
Reinventing the wheel might be a good idea if the wheel then rolls faster
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 08:58 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
>
> > So, I might propose to have a voting on which VCS system we will use for
> > our centralized approac
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 08:58 -0500, Adrian Perez wrote:
> So, I might propose to have a voting on which VCS system we will use for
> our centralized approach, (if that hasn't happened already).
>
Bazaar was designed and written to be the distributed version control
system for distributions, in par
centralized approach, (if that hasn't happened already).
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 06:15 -0600, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> > Subject: Introduction to Ubuntu Distributed Development
> > From: James Westby
> > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:40:34 +
> > To: ubuntu-devel
> >
> Subject: Introduction to Ubuntu Distributed Development
> From: James Westby
> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:40:34 +
> To: ubuntu-devel
>
> The TL;DR version:
>
> 1) Version Control rocks.
> 2) Distributed version control rocks even more.
> 3) Bazaar
22 matches
Mail list logo
