[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Let's kill this part of the discussion right away [was: Re: How to cope with patches sanely]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>         And no, I can do this using plain old arch, and I don't really
>  have to change my SCM.
>         But not all Debian maintainers are using git;
>> Version control systems that have content-addressable filesystems
>> (essentially, git and Monotone) are inherently efficient to
>> distribute; [...]
>         Which is great, but I fear it will not fly as a the one and
>   only

Ok, I apologise for leaving my note to this effect to the end of my
e-mail.  But let me repeat.

I'm not asking that you change the SCM that you use.

I'll say it again, this time for the other subscribers.

I'm NOT asking that you change the SCM that you use or the way that you

All I'm talking about is using git as a replacement for the *source
archive* format.  How the files are archived and distributed.  There are
compelling reasons to want to do this; not least getting around the fact
that shipping patch series in .diff.gz doesn't handle cases like
integration branches without adding a new patch format (which is also
something I think is probably useful, and a complementary approach).

Thanks for the rest of your e-mail, which contains constructive feedback
which I will now digest and respond to!


Reply to: