Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:46:16 +0930 From: "Wilkinson, Alex" <alex.wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Public Access to Perforce? Message-ID: <20040817031616.GB80641@squirm.dsto.defence.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040816124034.76591L-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <20040816.102432.126630708.imp@bsdimp.com> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040816124034.76591L-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
0n Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 12:42:50PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: It has a selected subset (TrustedBSD, SMPng, KSE, I believe). There's a lot of stuff in the Perforce repo, and CVS exports of Perforce trees are less storage efficient because of the name space / branching issue. There was a web server running on perforce.freebsd.org exporting the contents, but it had some problems and Peter hasn't gotten to updating it yet. Developers are selectively exporting branches; for example, I export netperf as patch sets on my web page: http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/netperf/ (FYI, there's now an RSS feed of my change log there :-). What's the diff between a perforce repository and a CVS repository ? [not knowing anything at all about perforce] - aW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040817031616.GB80641>