* Daniel Cheng <j16sdiz+freenet at gmail.com> [2008-07-02 23:34:29]:

> 2008/7/2 Florent Daigni?re <nextgens at freenetproject.org>:
> > * Daniel Cheng <j16sdiz+freenet at gmail.com> [2008-07-02 23:21:45]:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Jano <alejandro at mosteo.com> wrote:
> >> > David 'Bombe' Roden wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tuesday 01 July 2008 06:02:06 NextGen$ wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> We all agree that that merging things from branches back and forth is 
> >> >>> not
> >> >>> easy with svn 1.4... but it will be easier when we will upgrade to a
> >> >>> merge-tracking enabled version.
> >> >>
> >> >> In subversion it will always be a cludge, though, because subversion 
> >> >> wasn't
> >> >> designed with repeated merges in mind.
> >> >
> >> > Have you read the svn 1.5 release notes? You'd still call it a kludge? 
> >> > I'm
> >> > honestly asking, I'd like to know from someone used to git.
> >>
> >> While I love using git, I am more interesting in DSCM then any
> >> specific SCM. The ability of commit locally and work offline allow me
> >> to test out my idea more freely.
> >> You know, everybody have some crazy idea that he want to test without
> >> letting others to see.
> >> For instance, I have yet another experimental database and an
> >> alternative location swapping code locally.
> >>
> >> A (good) side effect is the ability to work offline.
> >>
> >> Easy merge management is just a side effect of DSCM -- DSCM encourage
> >> branching and forking. That's why every DSCM comes with a set of good
> >> merging tools.
> >
> > That's my point: at this stage we don't want to encourage branching nor
> > forking.
> 
> The tools make this easier does not means we have to encourage it.
> 

Sure but why should we make it easier if it's not to encourage it then ?
:)

> > We need the network to be homogeneous version and bug-wise to be debuggable
> > and to move forward.
> 
> Anyway, you can't stop me (or anybody else) from using git-svn locally
> (and I am using it).
> 

I have no problem with you (or anybody else) using the tools they want.
I just don't want brazillion of incompatible/forked clients to spawn up
in the wild and to connect to the main network.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080702/8e6f6d9d/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to