Re: [parted-devel] Re: Parted 2.0 plans

[Leslie P. Polzer]

Otavio Salvador wrote:

> Anything is inferior to darcs regarting to merging capability.
Yes.

>  - git / cogito
Those are the only ones I haven't checked out more closely, yet.
Might be too complex for Parted.

>  - bzr (bazaar-ng)
IMHO too complicated.

>  - darcs
Well, I'm obviously for this one :)

>  - svn / svk
I used this for distributed work, but it feels like a kludge and
probably is.  Also, the dependencies of svk are horrible.

> Personally I prefer bzr, git or darcs. 
The only alternatives that seem to be acceptable besides darcs
are monotone and Mercurial.

> > > Debian Installer does it. We have a parted_server that has every
> > > command queued there and then when the user ask it, it saves
> > > everything together. Might help here.
> > Where can we get it?  Will it integrate well?
>
> It's how d-i uses parted and might be a start code to check.
>
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/d-i/trunk/packages/partman/partman-base/parted_server.c?op=file&rev=0&sc=0
Will take a look at it soon.

> po4a is the way I found to allow people to translate the manpages and
> gettext cannot do that.
Alright, let's see whether we can get that po4a stuff into good shape
(configure checks and the ability to turn it off is a must) for
1.8-final.

 Leslie