On Tuesday 23 January 2007 01:44, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > What I find arguable/questionable in FE's CVS-repos, is the way > "FE-branches" have been implemented into it. They are implemented as > separate directories instead of CVS-branches. If real CVS-branches had > been used several details would have been much easier. > > In the early days of FE, I had been told the reason for this design > decision had been AVCs, because CVS storing branches in files would > prevent AVCs to be applicable. Way back when, the dist-cvs method did use actual cvs branches, however the workflow was not easy to apply changes across all branches. And to some extent having actual directories made life a bit easier for many things. Now, directories COULD be implemented at the same time as cvs branches, just a little extra work on the tool side when bringing them down. But here we are, and most of us feel that it would be better to move to a new SCM with new possibilities rather than put significant effort into CVS. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgphp7faL3WvL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
