* Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> [080527 01:55]:
>> Would it not be better to use git for this purpose?
> >
> > See http://git.postgresql.org
I'll not contribute to the RECURSIVE patch, but I'm more than willing to
help anybody setup/learn GIT, and the various workflows it supports
(yes, it can support multiple types of workflows)
> As far as I can tell from the URL above to share foo's work,
>
> 1) foo publish his work to ~foo on git.postgresql.org
>
> 2) bar retrieve patches from 1) then apply to his own git braches.
That's certainly *one* way. Of course, you can use CVS w/ it's web
interface the same way ;-)
> The method I propose would be something like this:
>
> 1) commit foo's work into the CVS repository.
>
> 2) bar does cvs update on his CVS working file.
>
> It seems later method is easy to use. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Something like this is easily done in GIT as well:git fetch ## Fetch any new commits done in the origin to the
localrepogit merge origin/master ## or any other branch you want..git push ## publish your work for others to
fetch
And if you really don't care about the whole "remote repo", you can usegit pull $remote $branch
to combine the fetch and merge into a single command.
And if you have conflicts you'll have to resolve them of course, but
the tools to help resolve them are much better in GIT than in CVS.
But by all means, if learning the nuanceses of a new SCM right now isn't
for you, go ahead and use CVS. Us GITs will still be able to use GIT on
top of the CVS repo ;-) In fact, if some of you want GIT and others
just "simple CVS", GIT actually contains a "cvs server" that can server
a GIT repo through the CVS protocol.
But if any of you are interested in GIT, and need some help, feel free
to contact me...
a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
