RFR: GIT Package VCS

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 13:00 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 20:37 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 11:06 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> > 
> > > Absolutely -- they have different reasons for wanting this than we do. 
> > 
> > Wanting what?
> > 
> > If what = kill centralised cvs for modern scm exploded trees, with
> > cvs/svn/whatever gateways, while keeping the current srpm export/import
> > modes, why not
> > 
> Yes.  But what is the end of your proposal?
> 
> > If what = get everyone to use _insert_preferred_scm_there and kill other
> > access modes → not good
> > 
> To be sure I understand, what are the other access modes?

archive + patches, srpm import/export, export gateways to other vcs


> 2) Having the ability to pull arbitrary patches out of our VCS vs
> pulling a discrete patch out of our current CVS system is a postive
> thing for working with upstream.

You're describing heavy forking which is not Fedora's target and not
needed by the overwhelming majority of fedora packages.

You're assuming upstream has the same vcs as you

And I'm not sure even in this case we'd want all your coding attempts
traced in a public vcs. Seems a lot of stuff you should do in local, and
then produce clean patches for the fedora vcs and upstream

> > > 2) Better able to rebase our local changes.
> > 
> > We don't want to get good at local changes, we want to push changes
> > upstream, and even cvs is good enough for our basic rebasing needs today
> > 
> We do want to be good at making local changes.  We want to be so good at
> it that when we submit the changes to upstream, upstream has no trouble
> recognizing that they're good changes and has no issues with accepting
> them.

And upstream will ask targeted localised patches not huge vcs feeds it
has to sift through

> Disconnected mode is a killer argument for changing from cvs-dist to
> DRCS-dist.  It doesn't address the reasons that exploded trees are good.

Well you've convinced me pretty well they're *not* good in a fedora
packaging context.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070607/37632fb2/attachment.sig>