Patches, Trac, VCS etc.

[Nick Hilliard]

On 07/07/2009 09:43, Shane Kerr wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 02:17 +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>> BTW, is there a particular reason why cruft-cleanout hasn't been merged
>> back to trunk yet? It seems like the consensus is that a cleaned up tree
>> is the way to go and is the one that will be transformed to 5.0.
>
> IIRC it's still under fairly active development by Nick, and the idea is
> to merge it into trunk relatively soon.

Yeah, Ive just been very busy these past couple of weeks.  I'm planning to 
take a look at Faidon's patches soon; most of them look fine from a cursory 
glance.

>> Also, let me apologise for the irregular way of posting my patches.
>> I've come to understand that posting them through Trac seems to be the
>> status quo around here. Besides some trouble I had on reaching
>> irrtoolset's Trac, I think it's wrong to use a bug tracker as a
>> patch-handling system. Don't get me wrong, I like Trac, but for the
>> purproses it was intended to be used, which don't include, IMHO,
>> (ab)using it as a VCS.

Yeah, trac is good and bad.  Its ticket management system is ok for dealing 
with particular problems, but as you've submitted a large pile of patches 
for a variety of problems, maybe it makes more sense to commit them directly.

Re: DVCS vs VCS, I guess everyone has their favourite version control 
system.  I'm not familiar with git, so I can't offer an informed opinion on 
why it might be better.

yes, cruft-cleanout should be merged into trunk soon.  Let's do that after 
getting Faidon's patches in.

Nick