-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Jan 25, 2009, at 1:37 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > (*) I'm probably missing something, but ISTM that committers can > already > use the DVCS - they only need to create a patch just before > committing. > This, of course, is somewhat more complicated than directly pushing > the > changes to the server, but it still gives them most of what is often > reported as the advantage of a DVCS (local commits, ability to have > many > branches simultaneously, ability to share work-in-progress, etc). In > essence, committers wanting to use a DVCS can do so today, by acting > as if they were non-committers, and only using svn for actual changes > to the master repository. The approach you outline also has the disadvantages of losing history at the point of patch generation, and causing a discontinuity in the chain of revisions leading up to that point. Depending on the specific changes being merged, this may or may not be important. You're right that we can do this today, but I still believe there are advantages to supporting a DVCS for the official branches. Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSXzkjnEjvBPtnXfVAQIUOAP/SLkPAkIqDKNpoIpbaCJTsoLwFsSKj58P ISKqF7QkMgjl+cnw4YngHHwJr+OniX4cR1Wc5S9LPB3xMgsoOtxqYWmvfG1ReJRs fbmI1iOOCmOY1MltRlPErihS3wk7+37pc4lIkEvClvZMRcoLq3JjborIQjiy0ORY pqmovGlx/AI= =wXVD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4