Daniel P. Berrange
dan at berrange.com
Wed Mar 1 09:22:11 PST 2006
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 04:43:37PM +0000, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 04:05:26PM +0000, Adam Lofts wrote:
> >>Also notice that the snapshot is a git repository! This would be my
> >>preferred method of scm for the bindings.
> >Since you mentioned SCM....
> >Since both Git & Mercurial are so similar, I'd go for either of them
> >in preference to CVS :-)
> Well, if we are doing this; the Java ones are all in perforce, not that
> I'd recommend it necessarily (because it's not free, not because it's
> not great).
I used Perforce for a couple of years & it is very nice to work with - in
particular it is super fast - just a shame its closed source :-(
> I think this was discussed a while ago and several people were in favour
> of subversion. I don't think we really need a distributed SCM, and
> (although I've not tried it) git is meant to be good for the kernel and
> not a lot else.
I've not tried GIT myself, but its very similar in capabilities to
Mercurial, which in turn is very good as a general purpose SCM tool.
The nice aspect of distributed SCM is flexibility - you can use it in
a manner that is very close to centralized system - ie have one master
repository, and just your local 'working' copy of the repository. So
your day-to-day mode of operation is very similar to what you'd see
with CVS/Subversion, but with the added advantage that you have full
SCM capabilities when you're without network (on a train, in the park,
etc) oh and because all SCM ops are local, it is *lightening* fast to
|=- GPG key: http://www.berrange.com/~dan/gpgkey.txt -=|
|=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=|
|=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=|
|=- berrange at redhat.com - Daniel Berrange - dan at berrange.com -=|
More information about the dbus