Re: [Squeak-VMdev] SourceForge or SqueakForge?

[<gor...@bl...>]

Hi all!

"Andreas Raab" <and...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
> >> we started yacking about this stuff way back in march and don't seem to
> >> have come to any conclusion yet. Since I'm getting bits together for the
> >> first 3.8 VMMaker package I'd like to know where we are going to go.
> >>
> >> >From my limited understanding of these things I get the impression that
> >> Subversion would be a better choice than CVS. It at least _claims_ to
> >> do better on some of the irritating things. Does anybody disagree
> >> strongly? Does anyone know if it is amenable to a nice Squeak
> >> client solution? Goran, you did SqCVS (well nearly, remember...) would
> >> you feel up to SQuVersion?
> >
> > Well, I have now spent a few hours looking at the available alternatives
> > and I am actually leaning towards Darcs (or possibly Monotone) instead
> > of Subversion. They are both distributed solutions and seems to fit us
> > better than a centralized solution.
> 
> I'm not convinced of that. I think the CVS server suited us just fine and I
> wouldn't mind continuing to use CVS (it has definitely the best clients)
> except for the feature list of subversion - it seems that the guys who did
> it really understand what's wrong with CVS.

I think all the systems I have looked at have "fixed" the problems with
CVS. :)

> > http://abridgegame.org/darcs
> > http://www.venge.net/monotone
> >
> > (I rejected Arch due to high complexity and problems on Win32 or other
> > non POSIX platforms.
> 
> Both of the above are thumbs-down from my POV. Darcs just seems ... odd and
> there isn't much to read about "how it works" (if you have a good url for
> the "theory of patches" I'd be interested in finding out more).

I will come back when I have tested it, I intend to test it anyway.

> Monotone
> looks cool (with p2p synchronization and such) but I think that the current
> set of maintainers prefers some control over the sources that are considered
> "official".

AFAIK Darcs/Monotone doesn't limit us in that regard - I mean, we can
just decide what is the "official" repo.
In fact, there is nothing different from today - I could set up my own
Squeak CVS and the confusion about which one is official would still
exist.

> >> Given a decision to move that way, where is a good place to host it? Is
> >> it plausible on SqueakFoundation.org?
> >
> > Yes, it is. If you give me a day or two I will try Darcs and see if I
> > can set it up at SqF to test.
> 
> Err ... no thank you - how about subversion and/or cvs instead? ;-)

Why don't we just move the CVS repo first, that way we at least get away
from the restricitions on SF?
Then we can always look at changing system after that, but then there is
no real hurry. Deal?

> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

regards, Göran

PS. I am on IRC now. :)