On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:16:07PM -0500, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote: > It's F7+5 and F8T1-57 (yes, less than two months until F8T1 under the > current schedule[1]). If we are going to replace CVS[2] with another > SCM for hosting the Fedora Package Repository we need to get started > now! And to get things started, we need to discuss what kinds of > workflow we want our new SCM to support. > > Here's a list of things to think about (thanks to Jeremy Katz): > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to rebase their package to a > newer upstream? Is it considered difficult, and can the SCM do anything about it at all? > * How do we make it easier for a maintainer to develop, test, and create > a patch to fix a problem that's being experienced in Fedora? I think that very much depends on the scm used in the upstream project. > * How do we make it easy to send these patches to the upstream of the > project being worked on? See above. > * How do we enable downstreams to take our bits, track them and make > changes as they need/want? You need to pick a distributed or two-way scm for that, e.g. git or mercurial. > * How do we better enable a user who has a problem with something we > ship to be able to fix it themselves and get the fix back to us? See above. Distributed/symmetric vcs allow for pushing/pulling from both sides (provided permissions are properly set). Personally I favour mercurial and git, and I think they are both that much alike that I would leave it to the koji developers to pick one, as they will be the ones that will go through the pain of implementation, and they should pick what will really be implementable in this short time frame. (ideally the vcs support in koji would become modular with an api so anyone can add his favourite vcs to it) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpjEJlsNG4SB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
