Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results

On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:37:05PM +0100, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 05:29:02PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> >> Uh, but that's exactly how I understood the proposal and I believe that
> >> the points I made (that you didn't respond to) still stands: That it's
> >> crazy to officially want to support git, bzr and hg *at* the same time
> >> *from* the same repo. It's just asking for trouble.
> > That isn't true. It is Bzr on server, with Git support. Nothing about
> > Hg, nothing about doing partly Git, partly Bzr.
> The potential problem I see is all of the remote branches will use
> different DVCS that do not support git + hg + bzr. So eventually all

Again: No Hg.

> of us will be forced to use all three tools in order to merge changes
> from remote branches (unless we expect *all* people to provide *all*
> changes as patches in which case I don't see the real gain of
> switching to a distributed tool).

Interesting point. I actually saw it as a benefit (store locally using
whatever you like). On GNOME server (personal stuff), doesn't matter.
Anyway, if you're going against the maintainer who wants to merge, too
bad for you IMO.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]