Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:40:14 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, re@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CVS Issues with branch.. Was: Re: HEADS UP: Be nice to -CURRENT ( "1 week Feature Slush" ) Message-ID: <p05101505b8b809610bf1@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020315141422.13304C-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020315141422.13304C-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 2:17 PM -0500 3/15/02, Robert Watson wrote: >My feeling is that at this point, we probably should just use >Perforce due to limitations in CVS. This seems fine to me. I am uneasy about perforce in cases where someone is developing something which is *meant* to be merged back into the main branch, and anyone interested in that change is told "just check the P4 repository". That is not what is happening here. I would not *push* to have this done in P4, but I certainly do not mind if the RE team wants to handle it that way. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05101505b8b809610bf1>