luislavena at gmail.com
Wed Oct 21 21:37:05 EDT 2009
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Luis Lavena wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com>
>>> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
>>> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>>> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
>>> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>> In favor here.
>>> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
>>> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>> CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project, mostly
>> because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain in
>> favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.
> I guess I don't understand this. Ok, so it's easier to setup a git server,
> but that's irrelevant since RF handles that for you. And cvs co/add/commit
> are no different in practice.
No, is not about the server, but the workflow. It is also the
inability to "offline" work or clone it so my I can keep I record of
For example, I don't remember the last time I installed or configure CVS.
> This seems to be the only real reason to do it - exposure.
>From your POV, there are others in relation to performance, offline
functionality and of course, adaptive workflows.
> Well, I'll probably move win32-api over first, with both the "C" and "FFI"
> branches. Maybe this weekend.
Excellent. Thank you.
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
More information about the win32utils-devel