From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Fwd: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |
Date: | 2008-02-11 23:18:25 |
Message-ID: | 47B0D7C1.6050807@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andy Colson wrote:
>>
>> Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM
>> that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there
>> is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support
>> such a thing?
>
> I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be
> changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go'
> (sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right?
>
>
Wrong. The buildfarm has quite a lot of CVS-specific intelligence in it
that will need to be adapted to whatever we use to replace CVS. It is
very far from "plug and play". And I sure don't want to keep a CVS repo
just on account of the buildfarm. If and when the "one true postgres
SCM" changes, buildfarm should change along with it. Working out how is
just a part of the problems we'll face.
I have deliberately stayed out of this debate, since I have nothing much
new to say (and I observe that nothing much new has been said ;-) ). But
let me repeat a couple of things I have said previously:
I want to make a change in SCM once only in the foreseeable future. And
I'm in no great hurry. If I have a preference it is ever so slightly for
Mercurial, but that's just based on impression rather than solid
experience. I have used Subversion for quite some time - it has sorted
out some of the more obvious wrinkles that CVS presents, but I'm not
sure it's that much of a quantum leap that it's worht the trouble. I'll
be interested to see what Mark Miekle says after looking at all the systems.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Decibel! | 2008-02-11 23:21:26 | Re: pg_dump additional options for performance |
Previous Message | Decibel! | 2008-02-11 23:12:46 | Mailing archive URL stability (was: Re: [HACKERS] Patch review) |