itetcu at FreeBSD.org
Sat Sep 18 11:17:29 UTC 2010
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 08:51:39 +0200
Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze at bsdforen.de> wrote:
> On 18/09/2010 01:13, perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> > jhell <jhell at DataIX.net> wrote:
> >> ... Mercurial being the distributed version control that it is
> >> allows you to clone, make the changes you need to the clone test it
> >> thoroughly and then either push or pull them to the main tree ...
> > At the risk of starting the VCS variant of the vi vs emacs wars :)
> > why Mercurial (rather than, say, GIT or SVK)?
> > And no, I have nothing against Mercurial. I don't know _any_
> > distributed VCS well enough to have an opinion of which would
> > be best suited.
> There is great documentation and re-education material
> (for SVN users) out there for Mercurial.
> But this is not going to happen any way. The ports are still stuck
> with _CVS_.
I'm still to see a concise, clear, precise, listing of advantages that
switching from CVS would bring us, that would overcome the effort
needed to do it (committers, users, infrastructure, tools).
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu at FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20100918/cb763aeb/signature.pgp
More information about the freebsd-ports