Re: VCS comparison table

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/21/06, Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:35:18 +0200
"Erik Bågfors" <zindar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> So... I do agree that revnos might not fit perfectly in at all times.
> But that they automatically mean that bzr is not a decentralized VCS,
> I strongly disagree with.  They are just one part of the equation.

Whoe are you strongly disagreeing with?  Nobody said it wasn't a
decentralized VCS.  But there is a _clear_ bias towards using it
with a central server.


Ok, I take that back :)

When I think "centralized" I think "everyone must commit to a central
repository"... which is not what we are talking about here...

/Erik
ps. Sean, your mailer does something wierd with my last name in the
to-field, so I can't just hit "reply" without removing my name
first...

/Erik

--
google talk/jabber. zindar@xxxxxxxxx
SIP-phones: sip:erik_bagfors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
sip:17476714687@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]