Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Reinoud van Leeuwen
Subject Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)
Date
Msg-id 20040809124940.GG50902@spoetnik.xs4all.nl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: Postgres development model (was Re: CVS comment)  ("Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 09:30:09AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > I haven't seen any particular reason why we should adopt another SCM.
> > Perhaps BitKeeper or SubVersion would be better for our purposes than
> > CVS, but are they enough better to justify the switchover costs?
> 
> BitKeeper ist not open source, so it's out of the question for most 
> people.  

Why? I understood that using BitKeeper for free for Open Source projects 
is allowed. (but IANAL).
It is available (on many platforms). It works great. Once you use 
changesets you'll never want to go back to cvs.

Producing an Open Source product does not mean that all tools are Open 
Source. Windows isn't and Postgresql is going to support windows.

-- 
__________________________________________________
"Nothing is as subjective as reality"
Reinoud van Leeuwen    reinoud.v@n.leeuwen.net
http://www.xs4all.nl/~reinoud
__________________________________________________


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Laszlo Hornyak
Date:
Subject: ErrorContextCallback
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Regarding redo/undo files.