From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18147 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2003 01:53:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18138 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2003 01:53:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO redhat.com) (66.30.22.225) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 20 Feb 2003 01:53:23 -0000 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id 599B31BCA9; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 20:53:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 01:53:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process Message-ID: <20030220015333.GB12001@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20030218042847.50F2E3CE5@localhost.redhat.com> <20030218023553.2BBB73D02@localhost.redhat.com> <15953.20132.193102.752916@localhost.redhat.com> <20030219014904.GA11446@nevyn.them.org> <3E539ABA.4050203@redhat.com> <1030219175720.ZM8839@localhost.localdomain> <3E53D47A.30809@redhat.com> <20030219203950.GA6639@redhat.com> <20030219151709.A75662@molenda.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030219151709.A75662@molenda.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00392.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:17:09PM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote: >On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:39:50PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>I know that Jason likes svn but I haven't used it. I'm not sure that >>it would be easy to convince me to spend any time trying to convert >>everything to a new source control system. CVS is nice because it >>lives everywhere and is a known commodity. > >I don't think I saw anyone suggesting alternative SCMs... cagney wrote >"sware, subversion, sourceforge", but he probably meant to write >"subversions", as in "subversions.gnu.org". I probably responded one message too late. David Carlton said this: >It might be nice if GDB were using a source code management tool that >didn't depend on having a single repository, making it easier for >people to maintain public branches elsewhere but to still sync them >with an official branch. So when I saw Andrew mention subversion, I thought we were still talking about source control systems rather than systems which run source control systems. cgf