Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 00:34:58 +0200 From: "Adrian Penisoara" <ady@freebsd.ady.ro> To: "Mike Meyer" <mwm@mired.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [OT] Q: what would you choose for a VCS today Message-ID: <78cb3d3f0802011434p5bed2b1ex39320962f0bc8bf5@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080131110237.06860561@mbook.mired.org> References: <78cb3d3f0801302245v2183c613t6ecdd9acebbe9ef7@mail.gmail.com> <20080131110237.06860561@mbook.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Jan 31, 2008 6:02 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:45:55 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <ady@freebsd.ady.ro> > wrote: > > Side-topic, if you bear with me: if you were to choose again what to > use > > as source revision control system (VCS) from today's offerings, what > would > > you choose to maintain FreeBSD's sources or a side-off project tracking > > FreeBSD as base that would allow better teams cooperation and easy code > > merging between projects/branches ? > > Pretty much any post-CVS VCS will do that. But if you want a good > merge facility, Perforce's are - well, after getting used to them, > everything else feels like throwing your code against the wall and > hoping the right parts stick. I talked to one of the git developers > about a year ago, and they were thinking about adding a guided merge > inspired by what Perforce does. > > I do trust you on Perforce being a strong contender for the job, but, unfortunately, looking at their licensing terms for OSS projects I do get some second thoughts. Perhaps that's why FreeBSD did not migrate mainstream sources over to P4 yet ;)... Thanks, Adrian Penisoara ROFUG / EnterpriseBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?78cb3d3f0802011434p5bed2b1ex39320962f0bc8bf5>