From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Wed 04 May 2005 - 23:56:00 BST
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 08:34:59PM +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> sam_at_vilain.net (Sam Vilain) writes:
> > I have set up a new project on OpenFoundry.org for util-vserver.
> > OpenFoundry is like SourceForge, except it doesn't suck.
> > http://utilvserver.openfoundry.org/
> > (no hyphens allowed in project names! bummer)
> > For now the important thing it has is a public read-only Subversion
> > server, and is trivial for project Admins to invite other people to be
> > committers.
> > So, you can grab the latest version of util-vserver from;
> > http://svn.openfoundry.org/utilvserver/trunk/
> > Then use "svn update" & friends to pull down new versions! :-D
> mmh... I am not very happy with the way how this was solved, because:
well, if you would show up now and then on the channel
we might have taken a different approach ... but I
guess although the various aspects might not be perfect,
IMHO the direction is generally good ...
at least I prefer this over a dozen different branches
done by everybody and his dog ...
> * afais, the complete history of changes was lost in the SVN reimport
probably .. it's not _that_ important for this purpose
> * the svn repository contains lots of autogenerated files (e.g. ChangeLog,
> Makefile.in, configure, ...) which should not be handled by SCM systems
very likely, we do not know the details of the tools
as you do .. so we have to do some guessing ...
anyway, I hope that you will participate and steer
this into the right direction ...
> * I do not think that Subversion is so much better than CVS that a change
> is required. Changeset support or support of distributed development
> would be arguments convincing me but SVN does not offer these features.
we do not think so either ... hmm, KDE finally moved
to svn ... well anyways it was just that Sam said it
would be easy to have the OSSF svn account and as he
did all the work, it was a logical choice ...
> * what's wrong with current hosting at savannah? Ok, they are excessively
> paranoid which makes things like file uploads nearly impossibly. But I
> still have hope that it will be fixed.
basically that it is an enrico only hosting, and that
we do not want to turn it into an all-world devel
> First two points can be perhaps solved by converting the CVS tree but I
> never did such a conversion. As already mentioned, I do not see the
> necessity of such a step.
well, this isn't intended to replace the savannah (i.e.
your) development branch, the idea is to have a breeding
ground for various changes, kind of idea pool, where
you can skim the useful stuff very easily ...
if you have a better solution for that, please let us
know, we are easily convinced by good arguments ;)
> Vserver mailing list
Vserver mailing list