sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Pieter Lenaerts <e-type AT sourcemage.org>
- To: "sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:52:12 +0100
Op do, 16-03-2006 te 23:42 +0100, schreef Arwed von Merkatz:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:26:14PM +0100, Pieter Lenaerts wrote:
> [...]
> > what other reasons did we have not to use centralized for the grimoire?
> > (not other teams)
>
> Not sure how you got that idea, I never said we want a distributed
> system. What I said that _if_ we use a distributed system it has to have
> a way to have a push-based central repository, i.e. having to pull
> changes done by other developers into the main one is not an option.
I didn't mean to say that _you_ said we should use distributed. sorry
for the confusion.
someone (afk iirc?) had the creeps of the single server being a single
point of failure (not without a reason of course), but that's not a good
motivation for using distributed imo, it's a good motivation of having
backups and a recovery plan
the push is of course a necessity
--
Pieter Lenaerts
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org
"Linux so advanced it may well be magic"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dit berichtdeel is digitaal ondertekend
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement
, (continued)
- 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
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Andrew, 03/16/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Mathieu L., 03/19/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Seth Woolley, 03/20/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 03/20/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement, Seth Woolley, 03/20/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.