Vanilla List Maling List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[VANILLA-L:702] Re: [VANILLA-L:700] Re: Server code in CVS?
Note: I'm not going to push the issue really hard, but I think it warrants
discussion, so here goes...
> From: Alec Habig <habig@budoe.bu.edu>
> I would also vote no. Without Nick and James to referee the patches
> that have been sent in, we would have had a broken server many times.
> With a project such as this, with such a wide range of people
> contributing a little bit, our current model works better. CVS works
> better if there are a few active programmers and one set of code.
I agree that we don't want too many people changing the code at once to
preserve sanity in the source tree. My primary argument for using CVS
would be the ability to set up an anonymous CVS server for updates to local
code. With anonymous CVS, you set your CVSROOT environment variable to
an address, such as 'anonymous@vanilla-cvs.netrek.org:/vanilla_src', and
then local source trees can be updated with cvs commands.
Anonymous CVS, like anonymous ftp, allows anyone _read_ access to the code,
and can provide write access to a select few.
So basically, patch distribution boils down to a single cvs command.
See: http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html
Bob Campbell
+
++ Vanilla-l Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe vanilla-l" to majordomo@real-time.com
For more information: http://archives.real-time.com