[beports] Re: Changeset 60
- From: Brecht Machiels <brecht@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: beports@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 18:04:33 +0200
Hi guys,
On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 17:23 +0200, Ingo Weinhold wrote:
> > BePorter needs patches in the end, but
> > it can't to my knowledge cope with patches against repositories yet.
>
> If the whole source is mirrored, it could just as well download the patched
> sources directly.
Don't worry about BePorter. I think we should in the first place look at
what makes more sense from the porting point of view.
As Andreas pointed out sometime ago, BepFiles only make sense for
releases, and not so much for trunk revisions. I suppose group porting
efforts will also focus on the trunk versions?
> > So that's two different things anyway.
> > It could be that there is an Assembla size limit. We wouldn't need to
> > care if we do move the SVN to a Haiku server.
>
> Yep, SVN or an alternative. :-)
I don't think there's any problem installing any VCS of our liking on
the new port.haiku-files.org server. Although, I am wrestling a bit with
getting Trac to work on it :/
> > It might make sense to set up repositories on a project basis though.
> > So, for porting SVN or CVS projects we might use Git (don't know
> > Mercurial[2]/Bazaar[3] too well, but Git seems easier to use on Haiku
> > for now with the others' dependency on Python); for a project using
> > Git obviously use Git, for a project using Bazaar use Bazaar etc.
> > Personally I have found Git to better handle merges than SVN/CVS but
> > it seems to lack an equivalent to the svn copy operation for files. If
> > we don't want to or can't host such repositories on our own server,
> > for Git repo.or.cz would be an option, for Bazaar launchpad.net.
> >
> > Anyway, +1 for using *some* distributed versioning system for group
> > efforts.
>
> >From what I've heard about git, it sounds quite nice at least, but I
> haven't really used git or any of the other distributed version control
> systems yet. I think it's definitely worth to examine whether any of them
> could be used for a unified ports tree. Or if not, whether a server could
> be set up to host individual repositories.
IMO, it seems better to set up individual repositories for larger
porting projects.
Regards,
Brecht
--
BePorts homepage - http://tools.assembla.com/BePorts
List archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/beports
Administrative contact: brecht@xxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
