From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 4 16:26:30 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from smtp3.xs4all.nl (smtp3.xs4all.nl [194.109.6.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D80F8152D3 for ; Tue, 4 May 1999 16:26:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from plm@smtp3.xs4all.nl) Received: from localhost. (dc2-isdn21.dial.xs4all.nl [194.109.148.21]) by smtp3.xs4all.nl (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA07935 for ; Wed, 5 May 1999 01:26:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from plm@localhost) by localhost. (8.9.3/8.9.1) id BAA00668; Wed, 5 May 1999 01:26:14 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from plm) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BitKeeper (was Re: solid NFS patch #6 avail for -current - need testers files) References: <87n1znnyu2.fsf@totally-fudged-out-message-id> From: Peter Mutsaers Date: 04 May 1999 23:29:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: Robert Watson's message of "Sat, 1 May 1999 14:37:29 -0400 (EDT)" Message-ID: <87n1zka5gy.fsf@muon.xs4all.nl> X-Mailer: Gnus v5.6.45/Emacs 20.3 Lines: 31 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >> "RW" == Robert Watson writes: RW> So will bitkeeper provide a nice interface for migrating code RW> from an existing and well-established CVS repository to RW> whatever they use? I've looked at bitkeeper and wonder what exactly are it's advantages over CVS. It's model looks very much geared towards the fragmented way Linux is developed, offering no advantages for more centralized models such as FreeBSD or most commercial internal environments. In the Linux environment the 'patch' is everything, and the kernel looks like a big pile of 'patches' to me. Thus in bitkeeper generating these patch sets (containing history & log messages) to submit from one repository to another is important, because people exchange patches all the time. The other thing is some graphic tools (written in tcl/tk) but there are also some of such GUI layers for CVS, though they've never become very popular because the command line (combined with UNIX pipes & std. commands, filters) cannot be beaten for this type of work IMO. I'd suggest to at least wait a (long) while to see how it is developing. At the moment I see absolutely no advantage for more centralized development models. -- Peter Mutsaers | Abcoude (Utrecht), | Trust me, I know plm@xs4all.nl | the Netherlands | what I'm doing. ---------------+---------------------+------------------ Running FreeBSD-current UNIX. See http://www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message