sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:32:03 -0600
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Andrew "ruskie" Levstik wrote:
>
> I see nothing wrong with having multiple SCM's.
>
My only problem with having multiple SCM's is that if a new developer
wants to contribute, but isn't sure where they want to contribute, they
will have to learn multiple SCM's and the commit methodologies applied
to each one. I, personally, would find that annoying. I would like to
see the entire project using one SCM. Keeps it simple, keeps the code
together and in the same format (backend storage). Less to manage.
- --
David Kowis
ISO Team Lead - www.sourcemage.org
Source Mage GNU/Linux
Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to
find easier ways to do something.
- Robert Heinlein
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
- Arthur C. Clarke
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)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=UKNW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Robert Figura, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Maurizio Boriani, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, David Kowis, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Karsten Behrmann, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Andrew "ruskie" Levstik, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, David Kowis, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Matthew Clark, 03/16/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Eric Sandall, 03/20/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Maurizio Boriani, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, neuron, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Maurizio Boriani, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Andrew, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Andrew, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Andrew, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Pieter Lenaerts, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/16/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.