public inbox for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Trenton Adams" <trenton.d.adams@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage and rsync vs svn
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 04:58:42 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b1675090606190158r260b6340q2c009f0cb83a68b0@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200606191050.52681.bo.andresen@zlin.dk>

Thanks for the reply. Interspersed comments below...

On 6/19/06, Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@zlin.dk> wrote:
> On Monday 19 June 2006 09:58, Trenton Adams wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I'm just curious about something.  I've noticed many people report
> > problems with their repository syncing simply because someone was in
> > the middle of committing to the repository.  Couldn't this be resolved
> > by replacing the syncing mechanism with *svn* as opposed to rsync?
> > After all, it does have atomic transactions, and you cannot get a
> > partially updated repository when you use it.
>
> Perhaps it could. But I don't think that problem is important enough to make
> Portage usage depend on Subversion.

Well, it wouldn't have to *depend* on subversion.  The rsync could
still be used.  All that would need to happen is that the location
that people would be able to rsync with could be checked out
regularly.  Then the rsync could have an exclude for the ".svn"
directories, or whatever administrative directories there would be,
depending on the VCS you use.

>
> [...]
>
> > One other benefit of this mechanism, that I can think of, would be
> > that I could easily roll back to my last sync date or release, if some
> > of the updated ebuilds caused me problems.
>
> That really should not be necessary. What you should of course do is file a
> bug so the problems can be fixed for everyone.

Well, one problem I had was not actually *really* bug.  It was a
requirement that I did not fulfill, but was unable to figure it out
instantly.  So, rolling back would have been very useful at that time.
 It would just add another level of safety.

>
> > Any thoughts?
>
> Currently the developers are still using CVS for the tree. Migrating to
> another VCS does have a high priority but they have not even chosen which VCS
> to migrate to. There is a Google Summer of Code project which is supposed to
> test the different options to give a good basis for making a decision. This,
> however, affects the Gentoo developers only.
>
> --
> Bo Andresen
>
>
>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list



  reply	other threads:[~2006-06-19  9:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-06-19  7:58 [gentoo-user] portage and rsync vs svn Trenton Adams
2006-06-19  8:50 ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2006-06-19  8:58   ` Trenton Adams [this message]
2006-06-19 10:13     ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2006-06-19 20:15       ` Trenton Adams
2006-06-19 21:52         ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2006-06-19 21:59           ` Teresa and Dale
2006-06-20  5:26           ` Trenton Adams

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9b1675090606190158r260b6340q2c009f0cb83a68b0@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=trenton.d.adams@gmail.com \
    --cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox