[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] bitkeeper gone in 2 weeks - which RCS?
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, aq wrote: > anyway we must choose one. i vote for svn (do we usually fork the > repo? i guess not). We fork all the time. It's a common way of doing development with a distributed revision control system - people check out the upstream sources, branch them locally and still have all the benefits of revision control when it's time to merge new upstream changes into their local repository. The reason there's no forking in the central repositories is that it's not needed with distributed revision control systems. > mercurial is the second choice to me. Any of the distributed systems would work fine. Central revision control would be next to useless. -- The Theory of Escalating Commitment: "The cost of continuing mistakes is borne by others, while the cost of admitting mistakes is borne by yourself." -- Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Laureate in Economics _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |