Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: hasufell <hasufell@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 19:55:04
Message-Id: 4FBD3FCE.4000002@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Arun Raghavan
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 +1 for git
5
6 I am more used to it, I find it easier to use regarding the utilities
7 as well as the gui and it is more consistent.
8 The fact alone that I can update a single directory in CVS without
9 updating all others can cause breakage, cause repoman checks may be
10 erroneous.
11
12
13 On 05/23/2012 09:37 PM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
14 > I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
15 > Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init
16 > systems and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather,
17 > and it's good enough for you.
18
19 This sounds rather emotional to me.
20 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
21 Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
22 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
23
24 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPvT/OAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzgPIH/38QflM4GNiUNo3bC5/8tock
25 FM03JE1Iln4ThvLl25opwGiO5R8akoD3koroUVPLoWV//QfYmcQIm7k7dJJCk4+m
26 WSQ6H21fL9v2m6QX7PuJwaENFSFBxu3UFy6BE+39iFJAPBiigH1hbE0rad/twYdr
27 xhnHZti1rGbaFBeXxlGmdhJYi7dtndyuZgTu0oQFfE0+sAAK2GPe5CGLoOFHdtxS
28 WCMY3C3cB0R7XPoJwUvvt2KmIEXNWfq6rDW3o6so89VdRSNykwMLdK1eZ+MZidIE
29 61CAJiuIsT4cKX5pbqo72GtU4tUOkQ6jjaJhofAcrSMYKA0IsxYvFAYnKqO4lh4=
30 =cdBk
31 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----