| From: | David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite) |
| Date: | 2004-03-24 21:33:49 |
| Message-ID: | 4061FEBD.40700@zara.6.isreserved.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> (btw, if you want to work offline, which i saw referred to a couple of
> times, wouldn't cvsup do most of the job?).
From what I understand, a "distributed" source control means each
developer gets his own _repository_, not just a working copy. This means
you can commit to your own repo and even accept patches (either from the
master repo, other developer's repo, or from a 3rd party). In Linux
analogy, each developer can become an Alan Cox and maintain his own -ac
line.
From what I understand, CVSup is a tool to mirror the repository. It
doesn't allow each copy of the repository gets independently developed,
and then transferring around the modifications, or does it?
--
dave
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-24 21:39:11 | Re: ERROR: column "currec" does not exist while calling function with 'record' (or %rowtype% argument |
| Previous Message | David Garamond | 2004-03-24 21:22:52 | Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-24 21:36:54 | Re: rotatelogs integration in pg_ctl |
| Previous Message | David Garamond | 2004-03-24 21:22:52 | Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite) |