Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 23:23:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee (Narvi) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), nbm@mithrandr.moria.org (Neil Blakey-Milner), rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in (Rahul Siddharthan), mellon@pobox.com (Anatoly Vorobey), chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Salon article on BSD Message-ID: <200005182323.QAA10745@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000518223638.95256K-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> from "Narvi" at May 18, 2000 10:39:28 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > If he had adopted a constraining tool like CVS, Linux would have > > > > forked on no less than 3 (mathematically) documentable occasions. > > > > > > What do you mean by "constraining"? > > > > It constrains you to a single line of developement. For example, > > if FreeBSD wanted to work on a PPC port, there is a single line of > > developement called "current". The work could not occur in the > > "current" source tree, since it would be unacceptable to those > > who hold the keys, who are people not using PPCs, by definition. > > Like the Alpha port, it would have to occur in a vacuum, when the > > current tree was relatively quiescent, and be followed by the risk > > of non-apporval, and the requirement of a heroic integration > > effort (such as we saw on the part of the Alpha team). > > > > Actually, I think there have through time been some special branches > like say for CAM? Yes. What system that was competing with CAM was being developed at the same time in the context of its own branch, though? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005182323.QAA10745>