Archives
Archives
| From: | konsolebox <konsolebox@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo's future directtion ? | ||
| Date: | Sat, 29 Nov 2014 15:18:57 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAJnmqwZMmnkWS5ER8Vvbu4izwUZh=VfmysmrPJiVQBaS9k-hQg@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo's future directtion ? by Alan Mackenzie |
||
| 1 | On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Alan Mackenzie <acm@×××.de> wrote: |
| 2 | > Hello, everybody. |
| 3 | |
| 4 | Good day. |
| 5 | |
| 6 | > instead of conceptualising a "branch" (as you would do with Mercurial, |
| 7 | > Bazaar, Subversion, or even CVS), you need to think about "commits |
| 8 | > reachable from a certain head (excluding commits reachable from some |
| 9 | > other head)". |
| 10 | |
| 11 | I actually see that as a more flexible approach. git is designed to be |
| 12 | distributed and that's what everyone loves about it. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | For everything: |
| 15 | |
| 16 | http://stackoverflow.com/questions/802573/difference-between-git-and-cvs |
| 17 | http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/2011/06/09/git-lessons-learned/ |
| 18 | |
| 19 | Cheers, |
| 20 | konsolebox |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo's future directtion ? | Alan Mackenzie <acm@×××.de> |