From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from iai.speak-friend.de (iai.speak-friend.de [62.75.222.128]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3BKNhGb025902 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:23:43 GMT Received: from battousai.surakware.net (p3E9E0D11.dip.t-dialin.net [62.158.13.17]) by iai.speak-friend.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D95238001 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:23:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Christian Parpart Organization: Gentoo Linux Foundation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion? Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:23:29 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <425956D1.5040006@gentoo.org> <200504102357.13801.trapni@gentoo.org> <20050411072621.6f27027e@snowdrop> In-Reply-To: <20050411072621.6f27027e@snowdrop> X-Face: $-3HTEy*5}2A{'R'VPim$,8KKX$l|:P^RhP{;yQ)g;]4isyohrOfk\)=?utf-8?q?Q=2Ep=23F3RWB=7D!m=24zn=0A=097=5CPUKBYRKDFUU=3A=5CZ+U=5Fa-/=5BhI?= =?utf-8?q?8DJZ?="WPC2j~}(N."(JB&VNb}kU&`> =?utf-8?q?9=3B=5FN=3BfnM=7BD=7B8=2EI+5=0A=09dg=60p=5EQ?=(:yE{eVgArPf190vEkbGis0vx];" =?utf-8?q?1O!L=7ByKN4J=5B4=27=7E=7Eh+o+=7D=2EgzkmqNs=60=7D=7C0uq8a=0A=09?= =?utf-8?q?=25WQg=3F=3D=25y7X74tMWEkL=5DQQ?=(_Yc"m*aC+HD%!,6/k>L7S%'<}_B2&cI}/W(p+;rJ%2`0A<) =?utf-8?q?F=0A=09P7P=2E=60=3Dy=7C=7DU=7E=3F!?= List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1987916.2kSYMOSHBG"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200504112223.32908.trapni@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 201af326-b0de-4f33-a465-4a617a5df8a2 X-Archives-Hash: f40f81eab1910dc2a7900d6c16a11763 --nextPart1987916.2kSYMOSHBG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 11 April 2005 8:26 am, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:57:12 +0200 Christian Parpart > > wrote: > | > SVN uses transactions and > | > changesets. These make a heck of a lot more sense if they're done on > | > a per project basis. > | > | reason? > > Because you can pull out a meaningful and relevant changeset without > having to arse around with path prefixes. Do you have to? If so, why? > | > Unlike with CVS, this makes a big difference -- SVN > | > revision IDs are actually meaningful, > | > | SVN repository IDs represent the state of the whole repository at a > | given time, nothing more or less. > > Not repo IDs. Revision IDs. That's the one I meant. yeah. > | Hmm... besides, the ASF is just having a single repository for all > | their public projects (with about 1000+ contributors) w/o any > | problems. > > So we should make the same mistakes as them? Sure, a single repo would > be usable, but multiple repos would be a heck of a lot better. Seriousely, this is plain low FUD unless you can give me a decent argument = on=20 why the ASF made a mistake here. =2D-=20 Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 22:20:40 up 19 days, 11:27, 4 users, load average: 1.33, 1.03, 0.88 --nextPart1987916.2kSYMOSHBG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCWtzEPpa2GmDVhK0RAkD7AJ9UTi2J7uukyOkHSsDTbrAuIQvYSwCeJiku gc7boAp3pZNolHwGT9YIeMo= =gLGj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1987916.2kSYMOSHBG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list