[OLPC-devel] OLPC development project organization. Status calls? Other techniques?

[Stefan Reinauer]

* Ronald G Minnich <rminnich at lanl.gov> [060615 17:17]:
> >Actually, that's not true.  We've been highly annoyed by it and have 
> >been seriously considering moving over to SVN.
> 
> I should say we've been very happy with svn on linuxbios.
 
And that was after evaluating GNU Arch, Bitkeeper, Monotone and a couple
of others. Didn't know Mercurial back then, and GIT was by means not far
enough.

> It's simple, it works, it doesn't have tons of features, however.
 
Probably quite some that we did not even find out about yet...

> I think for a non-distributed repository it's pretty good.

I fully agree. Since we switched, all problems with version control have
suddenly gone away. No single user request since we switched (before
that we had to support gnu arch several hours per week)

A nice concept does not help if it produces so many obstacles that the
time saved goes elsewhere. 

I was really impressed by the idea of distributed repositories when I
first heard of GNU arch. But this solves a problem that in the reality
of most software projects is not there.

A diff between a freshly checked out and a working tree is so simple if
working disconnected. And then, if this is really not enough: Either get
connected or take care of things that go without being connected.

People are hyping this too much. In the end these features are there to
make working in a team easier. And the only way this is possible is 
with good communication.

Stefan

-- 
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
      Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: info at coresystems.de  • http://www.coresystems.de/