On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 01:44:43PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
>
> I'm just looking at arch. It seems to be better than CVS - I never liked
> the version tracking since it was per file. :)
>
> Thanks for the suggestion - arch seems better than CVS.
>
Mmm, what's better among subversion and arch?
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:16:03 -0500, Adam Majer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I would consider bitkeeper out of the question for a central
repository. CVS and SVN are certainly options, although I tend to
prefer arch. Regardless of what's chosen, I plan to still use arch
fo
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 05:27:37PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Christian T. Steigies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 16:10]:
> > On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > All I wish is that we reduce the number of source packages for the
> > > kernel, to ease the load
* Christian T. Steigies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 16:10]:
> On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > All I wish is that we reduce the number of source packages for the
> > kernel, to ease the load for the security team.
> I don't see how this reduces the load for the
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/04/msg06531.html for an
>
> > > explanaition.
>
> > Oh... how come I've never seen this before? I thought I subscribed to
> > debian-k
* Christian T. Steigies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 12:10]:
> On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:02:03AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Francesco P. Lovergine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 09:55]:
> > > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 09:34:46AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> >
> > > > One other change I'd like t
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:02:03AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Francesco P. Lovergine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 09:55]:
> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 09:34:46AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > One other change I'd like to see ASAP is to having a "first class
> > > architecture set" instead
* Francesco P. Lovergine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 09:55]:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 09:34:46AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > One other change I'd like to see ASAP is to having a "first class
> > architecture set" instead of a individual kernel for i386 and alpha
> > (and possible more to add
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 09:34:46AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> One other change I'd like to see ASAP is to having a "first class
> architecture set" instead of a individual kernel for i386 and alpha
> (and possible more to add to this).
Could you please explain this better? What's s first cla
9 matches
Mail list logo
