On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 15:01 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote: > Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster@xxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > > > > I propose deferring this reorganization until we get the RPM > > > packaging stuff nailed down. Then we can just change the paths > > > around a bit ;-) > > Agreed, but I think we need some "thirds" and "me too's" before > > proceeding since it will shake up CVS a little. *sigh* If only we used > > Subversion. > > Yeah. Where the heck is Major Kong, er, I mean quaid? > > What would be so bad about using svn that we don't just use it. > IIRC, it doesn't seem to require a server process, just a properly > configured directory structure: similar to yum. SVN rocks, but it does require a server process. It uses either BDB or a customised file system for storage, both of which need to be modified by the server process. It also supports wacky things like "move" and "symbolic links", which make modifying and maintaining complex directory structures a lot less painful. Vote 1 SVN! This has been an unpaid political announcement. -- Jeff Fearn gpg fingerprint:5FB4 61C4 8BE3 4DF6 F7FD 37B0 95C3 0F36 21DC 65C6
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
