[Pharo-project] SVN vs Git for the cogvm

Mariano Martinez Peck marianopeck at gmail.com
Tue May 3 16:57:52 CEST 2011

Instead of discussing where to commit I would discuss how to merge and
define the process with VMMaker.  I mean, how WE (the community) and Eliot,
manage the development of Cog (the VMMaker part).

Take as an example today. There is "our branch" which is in
VMMaker-oscog-XXX.NUMBER. For example, the last one is
Eliot commits are in (since now) VMMaker.oscog-eem.56.  Who merges? Eliot?
us? Would Eliot took the result of the merge as his next base version?
Because suppose I merge it, and I get VMMaker-oscog-MarianoMartinezPeck.67
which is the merge with VMMaker.oscog-eem.56. Will Eliot take that version
and follow his code from that one?
or he will release VMMaker.oscog-eem.5N tomorrow, and we will need to merge
with VMMaker-oscog-MarianoMartinezPeck.6N?  if so, the merge will always be
more complicated and the differences will be more and more...



On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3 May 2011 16:36, Toon Verwaest <toon.verwaest at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 05/03/2011 07:57 AM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> >>
> >> LOL
> >>
> >> But I can tell that I hated when sbe changed under my feets from svn to
> >> git.
> >
> > Why the hate? See it as an opportunity to grow ;)
> >
> >
> Personally, i really like a
> git status
> command..
> It is much more convenient than analogous to svn or cvs.
> I am also like that i can do crazy things with branches/sources , and
> be sure that nothing is lost
> and i can always revert things back to normal if i break something.
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/attachments/20110503/c6ee2d6a/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pharo-project mailing list