Question about tagging
a.badger at gmail.com
Fri Nov 20 14:42:03 UTC 2009
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 08:50:06PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 00:50 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > And why can't all this be done with s/git/SVN/? All we really need apart
> > from what CVS already provides is atomic commit IDs, to make the
> > "maintainers would not tag themselves" part easily implementable. I don't
> > see why SVN revision IDs wouldn't be as good as git hashsums for that.
> > In fact, in principle, it could even be done with CVS, but instead of
> > tagging a single revision ID, the build system would have to tag the
> > revision ID it checked out for each file. Having atomic commits just allows
> > dragging around just one revision ID instead of a set of IDs.
> With sufficient hackery it could be done with either svn or cvs,
Kevin'spoint is that svn would require less new hackery than git. I believe
he's right about that as svn provides whoe-tree changesets without adding
all of the vastly different semantics that git does.
OTOH, nobody who hasshown up to do work has shown interest in a centrally
managed scm, only dvcs and just as you point out, really it's who's
interested in doing the work that matters. Although I will say that the
reason that we didn't switch to a different scm years ago was not that no
one wanted to do the work but that no one wanted to step on enough people's
toes while doing the work.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the fedora-devel-list