Re: [Bug-gnubg] cvs restored

[保坂範行]

Hi.

I'm not forcing you to use git.
I'm asking not to use CVS/SVN.
I'm asking to use distributed one.
There are choices, hg, bzr, etc. besides git.

I know msys git is not good enough, I've tried.
But there are some efforts. Such as:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gitextensions/
Have you surveyed any thing else?

(By the way, bazaar has TortoiseBzr.)


> inch of difference for us with few concurrent commits and branches.
In main visible trunk, That may be true.

How about who want to hack their own gnubg on their branch locally?
Good merging tools help them a lot for staying their code up-to-date.

Originally, open source means evey one has access to source.
In my view, it should be extended to sort of "open and cheap access to
repository"
Cheap merge is so important to who branches.

Less effort to getting newest codes for branches helps main trunk also by
increasing chance of getting new programmers or patches.

Note that "noboady waits for not comming train."  Please make train stop at.

Nori

2009/6/6 Christian Anthon <address@hidden>:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Russ Allbery <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> 保坂範行 <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> > Video: Linus on git
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8
>> > Linus damned CVS/SVN in this video.
>> > I hope that you are not going to kill Linus. :D
>>
>> GnuBG has fairly active Windows development.  Git support on Windows
>> sucks.
>
> Which was more or less my point about git. I'm sure that git is excellent
> and far better than subversion for linux kernel development, but doubt that
> it would make an inch of difference for us with few concurrent commits and
> branches. Client support is simply better for subversion, possibly better
> than for cvs also.
>
> Christian.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>
>