Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]
Zach Leslie wrote: >> http://www.fossil-scm.org/ l >> >> I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C. >Also, this particular tool bails out on the unix philosophy, with its >web >gui, ticket tracker etc. Do one thing. Do it well. I would argue that git bails on that as well, but that's a different discussion. Whether or not fossil does "one thing" depends on which "one thing" you pick. If the one thing is "version control", you're right. However "version control" is just one aspect of a larger task that does't have a common name. But if you look at systems designed for managing projects with source, you'll see they universally provide web uis, issue trackers, and wikis. Due you trash IDE's because they provide tools that are useful for doing "software development" instead of limiting themselves to being "text editors"? That fossil provides all of those things in a single relatively small program is a major win - at least for small projects (which is the fossil target). On the other hand, the fossil project does stay focused on the core task. They will reject a change proposal because it's not part of that task. That said, much as I like fossil (it's my goto VCS) I don't think it would be a good choice for FreeBSD. We're not a small project - we have people who are willing to devote time to things like an external wiki and isse tracker. Nuts, we have (had?) repos in four different VCSs! Those features in fossil are purposely kept simple since they're meant for doing one thing, not as general-purpose tools for lots of things. The issue tracker doesn't support branching issues, which is liable to cause problems in a large project. The FreeBSD wiki's are used for lots of things other than just project documents. The web ui - well, that's probably useable as is. But that one thing isn't a deal maker. -- Sent from my Android tablet with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my swyping. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 07:08:13PM -0800, Zach Leslie wrote: > > http://www.fossil-scm.org/ > > > > I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C. > > Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons. > > This misses one of of the main points raised in the original post. The > proliferation of git as a revision control system. > > Also, this particular tool bails out on the unix philosophy, with its web > gui, ticket tracker etc. Do one thing. Do it well. > Look at the internal of fossil and how things are done in fossil and you would understand that the last sentence is totally wrong. Fossil has really nice features that could nicely fits with FreeBSD workflows and greatly improves it. It has most of the new shiny feature everyone can expect from a dvcs, but it also has it drawbacks: The converted repositories (I did convert docs, src and ports) with full history kept: branches, tags, etc. is huge and the first clone would be painful to do. On the other side you have multiple working copies open on the same clone which is really nice. Some of the operations can be slow, Jörg Sonnenberger wrote an analysis about this one the fossil wiki, but don't remember the link sorry. From my testing, apart from the do we really need a new scm question? I am a big fan of fossil and find it easier and cleaner than all the other scm I know, I use git for pkgng and other projects, I use a lot mercurial on some other area, and fossil remains my favorite :). But I really don't think it could fit FreeBSD's requirements as it is now. but there are lots of room of improvements. The learning curve to fossil is probably really easy. On of the last thing is that fossil lacks keyword expansion. That said I'm happy with svn on FreeBSD, I still from time to time do conversion of out different tree to fossil for fun, but no more and I won't advocate for any vcs change. Bapt pgpCt99BR1uby.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Warren Block wrote: On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Warren Block wrote: On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Warren Block wrote: Trying to start this from SYSLINUX almost works. My menu config just does Actually, it does work on a real machine. It stalls on a VirtualBox VM during or after the NFS root mount. Strange , I will test it on virtualbox when I get some time next week . I did a lot of the testing initially on VMware esxi 4.0 and I did not have any issues related to VM stuff . What version of vbox did you use ? What network interface choice did you use in vbox ? VirtualBox 4.1.22, FreeBSD 9-stable amd64 host. Only the "PCnet-FAST III (Am79C973)" can pxe-boot, and only in bridged mode. Does this nic pxe boot other versions of FreeBSD ? Isn't there a way to make it think it has a intel em nic? Either this is VirtualBox weirdness as I would like to believe, or more likely user error, because now I've managed to boot FreeBSD 8 and 9 with this setup. Don't know what the difference was. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
