From: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Distributed revision control, etc.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:04:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <134AD180-FBA7-4B49-8858-9FBFA27A48BF@raeburn.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87oe205tc1.fsf_-_@laas.fr>
On Jan 25, 2006, at 08:29, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Ken Raeburn <raeburn@raeburn.org> writes:
>> But like I said, Arch being sufficient isn't, by itself, a reason not
>> to support something else.
>
> There will always be a single "official" repository, so the
> question is
> which RCS should be used to manage this one, if we were to switch to
> another RCS at all.
Sure, I didn't mean to suggest anyone should be stuck maintaining two
repositories for a single software package. Just that it doesn't
seem too unreasonable to me that someone should want the main one to
be SVK or whatever.
> I personally mirror the current CVS repository in an Arch archive,
> in a
> `cvs' branch from which I regularly merge my own development branch.
Yep, I'm pulling Guile into my subversion repository too, now and
then...
> Gatewaying among several distributed RCS with similar semantics (e.g.,
> atomic commits, changeset-oriented, etc.) should be much easier.
> I.e.,
> if the official repo is an Arch (or Darcs) repo, it should be quite
> easy
> for people willing to do so to perform some gatewaying with their
> favorite DRCS.
I've experimented a little with the "VCP" perl package under svk;
it's got some issues, but at first glance seems like a reasonable
thing. The source and destination repositories can both be of
several types, though I don't know if it supports Arch for either
yet. (And there's a "vcp" program, it doesn't have to be used via svk.)
Ken
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-25 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-19 17:23 [PATCH] Improved `scm_from_locale_symbol ()' + `scm_take_locale_symbol ()' Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-11 8:39 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-24 8:14 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-24 11:02 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2006-01-24 14:17 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-24 16:18 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2006-01-24 17:42 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-24 21:06 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2006-01-24 23:27 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-01-25 9:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-25 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-01-25 13:29 ` Distributed revision control, etc Ludovic Courtès
2006-01-25 18:04 ` Ken Raeburn [this message]
2006-01-24 11:11 ` [PATCH] Improved `scm_from_locale_symbol ()' + `scm_take_locale_symbol ()' Han-Wen Nienhuys
2006-01-24 14:22 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=134AD180-FBA7-4B49-8858-9FBFA27A48BF@raeburn.org \
--to=raeburn@raeburn.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).