On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 11:22 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 16:51 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > On Wednesday, 23 July 2008 at 09:43, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Doug Ledford wrote: > > > >I've been working on getting this set up and functional. > > > > > > <lots of complicated hacks and workarounds deleted> > > > > > > So Far I've been quiet on this, sort of hoping it would go away by itself, > > > but as a contributor with quite a few packages let me say that I'm deeply > > > worried about this whole distributed VCS / exploded source idea floating > > > around. > > > > > > It seems there are a few people who are a big fan of this, and about as > > > much active opponents. I have no problems with adding the possibility to > > > use a distributed VCS with exploded trees to the mix of ways to maintain > > > and build packages, but this should not replace the current nice and simple > > > setup we have. > > > > Seconded. I'm pretty happy with our current workflow and the only things > > I'm missing are "svn cp" and "svn mv". Seconded. I feel this effort is trying to solve a non-issue. > Actually, no. A massive patch set is no easier to maintain in a dvcs > than it is with patches. ... equally, it's no easier to maintain with a dvcs. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
