On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Diez B. Roggisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 August 2008 17:17:57 Mark Ramm wrote: > > > Others use SVN. As do many projects that use TG and for example use > > > svn:externals. > > > > Hmm, are there a lot of TG users who are using svn:externals to pull > > TG in their own SVN setup? > > > > I have not seen people doing this, but that doesn't mean it's not > > happening. > > I for once used to do that with TG1.x before there was a release that > incorporated everything I needed - that's why I brought that up. > > I don't consider this a killer-criteria - just something worth noticing > that > might break in case of a switch. > > In the end, my personal opinion is that I'm all open for new and better > ways - > if they *are* new and better. And not just new :) For example, back in the > days CVS lacked directory and moving support. SVN provided this, and it's > well worth the upgrade. The much easier branching as well. Sure, branching's a breeze in SVN but merging can be a little painful -- thus, the argument I typically hear for DVCS is just that. Merges are so easy it encourages everyone to work in their own sandbox for every distinct feature, constantly merging, pulling the mainline back in sync until the feature is done and tested and ready for a push back to mainline (or trunk, head, whatever). Arguably, there are a lot of benefits to this development strategy -- and it's just not so easy with SVN. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
