Re: [Flex-devel] Conversion to Git?

[Aaron S. <aa...@se...>]

In CVS, forking is a dirty word, because merging is extremely hard. In
git, a fork is simply your workspace, ready o be pulled back to
mainline. It's a fantastically easier workflow.

However your point is valid: if mainline flex is in CVS, patches are
its workflow :/

On Jul 10, 2012, at 1:53 PM, Paul <pa...@pr...> wrote:

> I really would rather not effectively fork flex. I would prefer to do
> whatever is necessary to integrate with the mainline.
>
> Paul
>
> On 07/10/2012 04:43 PM, ruertar wrote:
>> On 07/10/2012 04:33 PM, Peter Martini wrote:
>>> Any thoughts on converting to Git?  Sourceforge already has a
>>> (empty) git repository for flex, and it's not that difficult to
>>> convert the CVS repo to Git while preserving all of the history,
>>> branches, and tags.  (I've done it locally already).
>>>
>> I would like this as well.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Flex-devel mailing list
>> Fle...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flex-devel
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Flex-devel mailing list
> Fle...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flex-devel