Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 14:12:34 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <440A02C2.2060909@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20060304163522.GB912@tara.freenix.org> References: <20060303082016.GA17730@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <25963.1141377749@critter.freebsd.dk> <84dead720603030303p122ea0efn892bf9ffd32fce41@mail.gmail.com> <20060304163522.GB912@tara.freenix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Joseph Koshy: > >>A 'distributed' VCS with good support for branching and merging would >>ease the work of our non-committer volunteers. > > > And RE's work by not freezing trees. And all developpers' work by having > the trees not frozen for weeks. The release process is just an important as the normal development process. We could completely do away with code freezes and let people commit just like normal. There is little technical reason to have a code freeze. HOWEVER The purpose of the code freeze is to slow down developers and get them thinking more about what they are doing and focusing more on bugs rather than new features. This has nothing to do with the limitations or features of the VCS in use, it is purely a management tool. We could be use OMG-VCS that cooks breakfast and does your laundry as well as is the best VCS software on the planet, and there would still be code freezes. So, please do not drag RE into this as a justification for anything. K, thx. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?440A02C2.2060909>