sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Maurizio Boriani <baux AT sourcemage.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:18:09 +0100
On 2006-03-16 16:51:04 +0100 neuron <vlmarek AT volny.cz> wrote:
I mean, the scm will be imo always centralized. Even if we use XXX
(replace by your favorite truly de-centralized tool), where are we
building the tarballs from ? Where is the place which will not let
everyone to commit anywhere (we don't want to have random users commit
into sorcery - as opposite to help from the real users which we want).
Using a 'truly de-centralized tool'(TM) doesn't mean that cannot
be a central (or better as suggested[0] a hierarchial) repo.
Using a distribuited scm (like gnuarch or bzr or ...) in smgl we could build
a hiearchy which adapt our needs.
We could have many central repository as teams (sorcery, grimoire,
iso, etc...). This repo are writeble only by grimoire leader (and may be
it's assistant).
This main repos are builded by appling patches (changesets)
from sub-projects maintainer (and sub-project maintainer can accept
patches from others and so on).
example:
'sorcery team repo' 'grimoire team repo' '...'
^ ^ ^ ^
| | | |
| |
net section |
|
devel section
bye
Please, take a minute to have a look on this
[0] http://lists.seyza.com/pipermail/gnu-arch-dev/2005-April/001001.html
--
Maurizio Boriani
GPG key: 0xCC0FBF8F
=> E429 A37C 5259 763C 9DEE FC8B 5D61 C796 CC0F BF8F <=
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement
, (continued)
- 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, 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
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement, Pieter Lenaerts, 03/16/2006
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement was: SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement was: SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Andrew "ruskie" Levstik, 03/15/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.