dist-hg proof-of-concept ready for use

[Andrew Overholt]

On Wed, 2006-08-11 at 13:18 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 November 2006 13:06, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> > Perhaps.  Our group doesn't have the time or peoplepower to do this,
> > though.  Perhaps the various attempts at writing these plugins will pan
> > out.
> 
> Code doesn't just have to come from your group (:

I didn't mean to imply that.  I meant that I'm not terribly interested
in committing to working on a "Fedora Maintainer" plugin if it doesn't
work with stuff we have in the distro.

> > > Many upstream
> > > projects are transitioning to either git, or hg because of the
> > > distributedness of it, something you can't get from CVS or SVN.
> >
> > I don't personally see the need for the distributedness when it comes to
> > Fedora packaging stuff.  But perhaps I'm missing something.
> 
> Nope, you're not missing anything.  Eclipse plugins for git or hg would have 
> far more usefullness than just for Fedora's packaging stuff.  Many other 
> developers for other upstream projects could take advantage of such plugins.

Of course.  I've said for a while now that I'd like to see someone work
on those but it's just not a priority internally.

I was more interested in hearing why a distributed VCS was important for
Fedora packaging.  Daniel's comments illustrate a few benefits but I
don't _personally_ see how these are that important for this
application.

Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20061108/93c95cd5/attachment.sig>