[asterisk-dev] Unstable releases lately

[Michiel van Baak]

On 12:14, Wed 16 Jan 08, Paul Hewlett wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:55:01AM +0200, Paul Hewlett wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:27:51AM -0600, John Lange wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 09:45 -0600, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> >>> Subversion has indeed some intersting capabilities for branching and
> >>> such. But for the purpose of "building from source" all you really need
> >>> to know is:
> >>>
> >>>   svn checkout
> >>>   svn update
> >>>
> >>> You messed something? You delete it, and update again. You messed
> >>> something big? delete and checkout all over again. Or move aside and
> >>> checkout all over again. No need to keep 10 different snapshot tarballs
> >>> around.
> >>>
> >> Has anyone considered using Bazaar from Canonical ?
> > 
> > Or git? Or mercurial? Or darcs?
> > 
> >> It is like subversion but distributed i.e. you can do commits etc
> >> without needing the central server. Of course you can still have a
> >> central server....
> > 
> > Generally distributed version control systems are even more complicated
> > than centralized control systems such as Subversion.
> > 
> > They have very cool features for *developers*. The ones that are not
> > afraid of using Subversion in the first place. But as for easy of use
> > for the simple "grab the latest copy" usage pattern - they only make
> > life more complicated, in the worse case. For instance, there is no
> > simple and short revision number (because there's no One Repository tht
> > sets revision numbers at commit time for everybody).
> > 
> 
> True - but recently the asterisk SVN server was down and with Bazaar
> that would not necessarily be a problem - you could setup 2 central
> Bazaar servers - lose one and you still have the other.
> Or checkout the SVN tree into a bazaar repository on your PC and use it
> to merge with other developers independently of the central server.

If your next point is really true, there would be no problem
at all. The svn server where the commits go in the first
place is still up and running. It's the public svn mirror
that's having trouble and is resyncing with the master as we
speak. The devs with branches etc are still able to commit
their work and share code etc.

> 
> I would think that anyone who uses a VCS such as subversion etc. would
> be a developer - users just use tarballs or rpms or whatever ?

This is not true.
A lot of users that actually report bugs run svn so they can
checkout the latest sources once the fix for their problem
appears in svn.
rpms etc are most of the time a couple of releases behind,
because the packaging etc needs to be done and tested. By
grabbing a tarball from digium you still need to compile the
code so in that case people can most of the time manage to
learn 1 or 2 subversion commands. This gives them the
benefit of running the latest fixes on a production branch.

> 
> Paul
> 
> - --
> www: http://www.gccs.co.za
> Tel: +27 86 111 3433 Fax: +27 86 111 3520
> Cel: +27 76 072 7906
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFHjdjonlnAdahOeIsRAooZAJ9VNMSPyMHTYSJA6w3KKtMkngAFZACfWoSk
> tDtHR5yGvla2MI7wVRustlk=
> =WIlD
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
> 
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

-- 

Michiel van Baak
michiel at vanbaak.eu
http://michiel.vanbaak.eu
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x71C946BD

"Why is it drug addicts and computer afficionados are both called users?"