On Sunday, October 13, 2002, at 11:18 PM, Tom Lord wrote:
> A sort of non-sequitor: it didn't occur to me until last night, but
> getting an svn repository to host an arch repository should be utterly
> trivial -- a couple of weeks work, at most. (I can't really afford to
> do that work myself, at the moment.) It's just a matter of
> translating a small subset of FTP operations into svn operations --
> nothing more.
>
> You'd get, as a free side effect, a (good) form of distributed
> repositories, "for free". People could write pretty simple scripts
> that convert on-demand between parts of the svn tree holding arch
> global revisions and parts holding ordinary full source trees.
This sounds neat, but I'm pretty sure I don't really get it yet. For
those of us who don't really understand the background of arch, do you
want to give a few more paragraphs explaining what you mean? Would
this "for free" distributedness provide a local repository I can check
changes into on my laptop, and then somehow sync those changes up with
our company-wide repository when I get to work on Monday morning? (Is
that the same way BitKeeper works? That's about the impression I get
from their website.)
Thanks,
-David Mankin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 14 08:31:36 2002