First of all, I do not consider myself to be a 'major' contributor to the DPMT either.
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 15:07 +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: > No, what I said was: > > - I see no need to move to git as a team > - I can't afford to download all the git repos for packages I want to > modify once I can to some agree with Sandro here. I'm not a big fan of svn, but for the DPMT repository svn looks like the right choice to me. The big benefit of using svn is that each and every directory in a svn repository can be checked out forming a stand-alone local copy. And this exactly is not possible with other recently more-popular VCS such as Mercurial and git. Well, it would be possible to create a separate repository for each and every package, but as Piotr already put it, it would make certain tasks harder to achieve. Just think of the X-Svn-* to Svn-* field change recently. With separate repositories for each package one would first have to look up every repository URL, check out all of them, then apply the change to all of them and push all of them back. With svn it is as simple as checking out one directory (ie. packages/), apply the change and then do a single commit, which will push back all changes. Now the svn way seems a lot less complex to me, and that's why I would prefer staying with svn. However, if someone can point out that a 'better' vcs that has this 'every-directory-can-be-a-repository' behaviour, please do so and I would be happy to give that a try. Oh, last but not least, there's the old saying 'never change a running system', which one should really keep in mind when discussing such changes. -- Stephan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
