Re: WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP

* David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> [080710 10:19]:

> > The question is: what is your objective in providing this repository?
>
> Here are my objectives:
>
> 1. Make a repository that keeps up with CVS HEAD.

There are already at least 2 public ones that do:
git://repo.or.cz/PostgreSQL.git
git.postgresql.org (which seems to work best on http only!?!?!)

> 2. Allow people who are not currently committers on CVS HEAD to make
> needed changes.

Uh, the point of git is it's distributed, so you don't need to be
involved for them to do that....

> If you know a better way to do this, I'm all ears :) I'm completely
> new to git and pretty fuzzy on CVS.

Well, if you want to use git to it's fullest extent, you really need to
unlearn *all* of the ideas and restrictions your fuzzy CVS knowledge is
handcuffing you with. Or at least be able to stuff it in a box in some
dark recess of your brain, so as to not let it control the way you try
and use Git.

Git is *inherently* distributed. And it's *only* a "Content tracker".
Because of this, it works spectacularly well as 2 quite different tools:

1) A developer tool to manage their ideas, developments, and code (track)
2) A content distribution tool (publish)

> They aren't committing, at least in part, because they did not have
> any way to do so. I'm fixing things so that they do by creating
> git-shell accounts on git.postgresql.org which will have write access
> to that repository.

Committing in GIT has *nothing* to do with an account on
git.postgresql.org. It's a local operation, and if they are using git
already, they can publish any number of places. And If they aren't
using git already, then a git-shell account, or some special single repo
on git.postgresql.org isn't going to change that.

You seem to be trying to setup git as a "centralized" distribution tool
(#2 above), without it being used as a developer tool (#1). I really
don't see the point of that. The only difference from CVS that use will
provide is you can provide CVS+patch "easily". But anybody who's going
to use git to get CVS+patch already has git, and thus has CVS+patch
locally available in 1 command anyways...

I think Git's use as #1 *has* to come first. And, because of it's
inherently distributed nature, #2 "just happens" once people are using
it...

a.

--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.