On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 06:23:53PM -0400, Erinn Clark wrote:
> * Ana Guerrero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006:07:11 23:56 +0200]:
> > Yeah, Why not subversion?
>
> It's a personal thing for me. I hate it.
>
> However, I am not going to be the only one using the repo, so while I do
> not like subversi
Fernanda G Weiden wrote:
+1 non brilliant vote to subversion ;)
I'll take the liberty to cast a vote just in case I'll find my self
involved in DW one day... But since I'm not at the moment feel free to
inore ;)
Subversion!
Tina
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subj
Christine Spang wrote:
> I vote for subversion. And no, I don't have anything new and brilliant
> to add to the conversation, unfortunately. It's been covered. Look to
> the almighty brilliance of bubulle. :)
+1 non brilliant vote to subversion ;)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 04:27:00PM -0400, Erinn Clark wrote:
> I think we should switch version control systems for our website. Which
> one should we use? I will probably go with whichever option is most
> popular, but have a preference for not subversion. Discuss.
>
I vote for subversion. And n
> Christian Perrier (bubulle) always says that, sometimes,
> translators face a hard time exchaging between several different VCS
> because each maintainer has its own preferences, so at least the basic
> commands are required to help them. :-)
I'm even more direct than this.
Distributed
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2254 +0200]:
> Why not subversion? I've looked at many in detail and the final
> round was between bzr, hg, git, and svn. bzr is too much in flux and
> missed some features I'd like to see, hg and bzr will eventually
> merge, git is too lo
Erinn Clark wrote:
> I think we should switch version control systems for our website.
I think this mail should be posted to debian-www. :-) They're still using
cvs over there. The pain..
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/11/2006 07:23 PM, Erinn Clark wrote:
> * Ana Guerrero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006:07:11 23:56 +0200]:
>>Yeah, Why not subversion?
>
> It's a personal thing for me. I hate it.
>
> However, I am not going to be the only one using the repo, so whi
Please do not CC me on replies. But thanks for the reply anyway. :_)
also sprach Barton C Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.12.0035 +0200]:
> What sort of "properly" do you have in mind? Most users in X.org
> are treating git repositories as centralized repositories without
> any difficulty. T
On 7/12/06, Barton C Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My strong default preference at this point is for git. Itworks well, supports all the necessary features plus someextras, and is IMHO poised to be the default SCMS of choicefor a number of open source projects (besides
kernel.org andx.org).
* Ana Guerrero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006:07:11 23:56 +0200]:
> Yeah, Why not subversion?
It's a personal thing for me. I hate it.
However, I am not going to be the only one using the repo, so while I do
not like subversion, I do know how to use it and wouldn't exactly die if
it were the popular
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> also sprach Barton C Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2350 +0200]:
> > My strong default preference at this point is for git. It
> > works well, supports all the necessary features plus some
> > extras,
>
> Can it handle centralised archives prope
also sprach Barton C Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2350 +0200]:
> My strong default preference at this point is for git. It
> works well, supports all the necessary features plus some
> extras,
Can it handle centralised archives properly?
Can it handle external archives, like svn:extern
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 10:54:54PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Erinn Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2227 +0200]:
> > I think we should switch version control systems for our website. Which
> > one should we use? I will probably go with whichever option is most
> > popular, bu
My strong default preference at this point is for git. It
works well, supports all the necessary features plus some
extras, and is IMHO poised to be the default SCMS of choice
for a number of open source projects (besides kernel.org and
x.org). The cogito interface, which is rapidly improving,
ma
ti, 2006-07-11 kello 16:27 -0400, Erinn Clark kirjoitti:
> I think we should switch version control systems for our website. Which
> one should we use? I will probably go with whichever option is most
> popular, but have a preference for not subversion. Discuss.
I am fond of bzr; however, I don't
also sprach Erinn Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.11.2227 +0200]:
> I think we should switch version control systems for our website. Which
> one should we use? I will probably go with whichever option is most
> popular, but have a preference for not subversion. Discuss.
Why not subversion? I'v
17 matches
Mail list logo
