Mike Kupfer wrote:
"stevel" == Stephen Lau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Another reason is that there may be issues that we'll run into with
the larger workspace that we won't hit with a smaller one (with just
the tools).
stevel> Could you expand on this for me?
It's a bit like how jurassic finds bugs that we don't see in smaller
configurations. It's not a perfect analogy, in that one class of bugs
that a large OS configuration finds is race conditions, and that doesn't
apply here (hg is single-threaded, right?).
But unless there are other Mercurial users that are routinely working
with repos the size of ON, it seems like it would be better for us to
find scalability problems now, rather than when we move the ON gate to
Mercurial.
How about those of us routinely using mercurial with ON?
(that'd be me, stevel I assume, darrenm...)
Probably the majority of those of us outside, plus at least those two,
in fact.
stevel> Interesting idea. So take a partial Teamware clone of just the
stevel> stuff we're interested in, and bridge that to the Hg repository
stevel> outside? Am I understanding that right?
Yeah, though as Rich pointed out, you'd actually want 2 repos outside.
One is an exact clone of the Teamware workspace, and the other is our
actual gate. This implies having a gatekeeper. Of course, if there
aren't a lot of internal changes to the tools, gatekeeping shouldn't
take much time.
mike
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
