Thank you for your quick responses, 1. yes, git is not in the NetBSD tree, it's a point, but let's talk now only about the pkgsrc-wip project, which started "to get more people actively involved with creating packages for pkgsrc". 2. There could have been created a regular wip directory within pkgsrc tree, yet it isn't like that. So I understand the wip initiative (and support the idea) as a way to just bring more people to the pkgsrc world. 3. I like NetBSD and wish to use it, have support for it and get it improved for a long time. But what I (as a non-OS developer) can do for it is to (almost) only help with the packages. This is the key idea of the success of so many Linux distros. The core team is small, and any newcomer can easily contribute to the software packages (and other areas) he misses. This easy "get involved" step is really absent here, however simple it looks for old pkgsrc guys. And I strongly believe it's the reason why there is the luck of developers. 4. I don't like git. It takes a while to get used to its concept and to find and memorize just a few commands one need. On the other hand, it is perhaps the only system applicable for pkgsrc stuff these days (svn may be OK - but it's just an improved CVS; mercurial has wrong concept in my view; darcs is COOL but portability is POOR and the performance too; monotone or bzr... hardly) Git is really fast and efficient. But CVS is even harder to use than git (I use it only for pkgsrc and do not understand it). (May be a question of a particular opinion) 5. What could git bring to pkgsrc-wip? The speed of any operation! Storage efficiency. It is perhaps the most widely used system nowadays (outside NetBSD) so many people are already acustomed with that (and can start contributing at once). I don't see why an ordinary OS-user who just wants to submit a patch to pkgsrc-wip has to bother with another account. 6. No problem, with CVS I can do all that's necessary, but ... --- So that is roghly what I mean. Thank you again. JS > > I would like to see pkgsrc-wip community opinion on switching the > tracker from CVS to something more convenient. > > I have just found OpenBSD ports wip runs on git > (http://gitorious.org/openbsd-ports-wip). > > Well, CVS works and can work for another couple of years. But I > believe CVS may be just the most putting off issue for many new > potential pkgsrc contributors (and there is definitely a lack of > them!). > > Indeed CVS still works. I have switched to git for some things, and > find that > > + merging > + working offline > + letting non-committers contribute within the tool > - hard to understand > * people who don't get git yet will avoid projects in git > > In pkgsrc-wip > > we don't do merges > > offline work would typically be "spiff up some package, and commit > it when back to the net", and > > pretty much anyone can get a commit bit > > almost everyone using pkgsrc-wip deals with real pkgsrc which is in > CVS, which means they already have CVS running and understand it > > ** no one has articulated any problems getting work done in wip > within CVS ** > > so for now I don't see any advantage in switching. When pkgsrc > changes to a different tool, pkgsrc-wip following would make sense. > > > You said "more convenient". Could you explain what you are doing now > that's hard in CVS that would be easier in git? >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Palm PDK Hot Apps Program offers developers who use the Plug-In Development Kit to bring their C/C++ apps to Palm for a share of $1 Million in cash or HP Products. Visit us here for more details: http://p.sf.net/sfu/dev2dev-palm
_______________________________________________ pkgsrc-wip-discuss mailing list pkgsrc-wip-discuss%lists.sourceforge.net@localhost https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-discuss