[PD-dev] Re: PD-cvs Digest, Vol 21, Issue 30

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> Since Matju has stated that desire is a fork, I think it would be most 
> beneficial to all of us, including the desire people, if it used its own 
> repository.

Non Sequitur. Do you know what the letters CVS mean? They mean CONCURRENT 
VERSIONING SYSTEM. Where are the concurrent versions in there, if the only 
branch that is there is Hans-approved Miller-approved MAIN ?

> pd-devel is already pretty far afield for being a branch, it seems to 
> have many changes that are never intended to be merged into the main.

Most CVS branches ever made are not meant to be merged back in. (Which CVS 
repositories have you used apart from CVS's ?)

However, what's different from most branches, is that devel_0_39 and 
desiredata are full of changes that would never be merged into the core 
anyway, but it's not something that you are willing to understand.

> gaim-vv is a great example.  It was a fork of gaim to implement voice 
> and video, which the intention of folding it back into gaim. 
> Nonetheless, they opened up their own repository.

So, why did they open up their own repository? There's an explanation 
missing in the reasoning here. Why is the situation of gaim-vv 
particularly similar to the one of DesireData? Were there political issues 
over shared resources like access control lists?

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada