[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Thoughts and open questions on patch/dump unification

From: Dave Rolsky <autarch_at_urth.org>
Date: 2004-09-17 01:27:36 CEST

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> John Peacock <jpeacock@rowman.com>:
> > Is this a subtle bias because
> > it is written in Perl using the Perl bindings to Subversion or a more
> > direct criticism of the use of custom attributes to store merge points?
> I can't speak for anyone else here, but I regard both those traits
> as being kludgy.
> I think svk is a clever idea, but I would prefer to see support for
> decentralized development integrated into the subversion core and done

I don't really see this as terribly likely.

Storing merge history will be in the subversion core in the future,
according to the project's todo list. But the developers have been pretty
clear that decentralized version control is not one of the their main

> in a cleaner way. At the very least I'd be happier if the svk-equivalent
> stuff were in Python, which I think has better long-term maintainability.

So basically you have no meaningful criticism here, you just want to start
a language war. Good idea. Then we can fight about emacs vs. vim

Seriously, _you_ might be happier if it were in Python, but other people
wouldn't be. Who cares? Unless you plan to write an SVK-alike in Python
what's the point of bringing this up?


Your guide to all that's veg.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Sep 17 01:28:04 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.