On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:42:16PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:20:12PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > Imagine i upload a new nobootloader version, with some changes in it. I > > either > > upload it directly, without revision system, or with my own shadow copy of > > the > > d-i svn like above. > > > > Now, someone else needs to modify nobootloader. He is not aware of my > > changes, > > commits to the d-i svn, and uploads the package. My changes are lost. > > > > Next time i upload my changes, i may well not notice that there was another > > upload, and the other changes are lost. (Well, probably not, because i will > > have some svk based tool to merge those changes into my tree). > > > > So, we end up in a mess, because there is no more only a single > > authoritative > > (or even juste a single) copy of the repository for the package. > > > > This is the reason why i am arguing against the current proposal which > > doesn't > > restore my svn d-i access, and why i have not even tried to do any d-i work > > since then. > > > And there is the possiblity to send `svn diff` output to this list.
Sure, but it is inconvenient, and there are other things to do. But even then, there could be a lag from the list to it being checked in, or whatever, the potential for making a mess is always there, as much as you try not to. If we chose a centralized repository like subversion, then the only logical conclusion is to keep all changes in that repository. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
