January 5, 2020 5:50 PM, "Diana Eichert" <deich...@wrench.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 8:48 PM Theo de Raadt <dera...@openbsd.org> wrote: > >> > > SNIP > >> wow this is going downhill. random solo-repo people telling us what to do >> when Chuck Cranor and I started this whole export-the-repo model. >> >> get some perspective dude, hopefully in the jungle. > > It seems like a lot of people in this thread don't understand, a good > read is http://chuck.cranor.org/p/anoncvs.pdf > > It took me 10 seconds reading Chuck Cranor's web page to find it. > > Not certain why there has been so much noise on misc@ lately. done reading that entire document, however, this is a topic about OpenBSD choosing Git over Fossil, but the actual problem is reimplementing Git (Game of Trees is a Git implementation just like OpenGit) and that's ridiculous, however, having read that PDF document I question: which of those problems are present in Fossil, not Git? in presence of those problems, why not wait for fix in Fossil instead of rushing to reimplement Git? I always see the point in two things: 1. using something existing 2. innovating something new Game of Trees and OpenGit are not innovations, they are implementations of existing innovation, if you've seen my first message, I suggested option 1 there are OpenBSD innovations I really like: pf, doas, sndio
