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

Re: [Linux-cluster] Subversion?

On Monday 23 August 2004 14:17, John Cherry wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-08-23 at 11:02, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > In my humble opinion, Bitkeeper does not have a snowball's chance
> > in hell of getting established on sources.redhat.com.
> I kinda figured it didn't have a chance at sources.redhat.com.  But
> what about bkbits.net?

Why don't you take a poll? ;)

> However, bk is being used across the kernel development community and
> this does not appear to be changing anytime soon.

Regardless of its effect on Linus's scalability, the kernel development 
community is deeply fractured over Bitkeeper.  Please don't be fooled 
by the apparent low profile of this subject on lkml.  We do not need a 
self-inflicted wound like that in the cluster community.

> BTW, most developers do just fine with up to date tarballs, so source
> control is not a huge issue for most of them.

Yes, I personally prefer tarballs when I'm checking out a project for 
the first time.  However we still need a repository somewhere.



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