On Feb 23, 2007, at 11:24 , Andreas Pflug wrote:
>>
> It probably _can_ never happen, because that would have to be a
> one-for-all solution, embracing both centric and distributed
> repositories, combining contradictionary goals. So the first
> question to
> answer is: Will PostgreSQL continue with a single repository (the
> project was managed very successfully this way for a long time), or
> try
> a distributed approach. IMHO facts would quote for a central
> repository,
> which would drastically reduce SCM candidates.
Any distributed SCM can be inherently be used as a central repo. The
project leaders would merely designate one place from whence builds
are generated and developers would simply sync with the "central" repo.
In fact, distributed SCMs fit the open source development model
better because any failure of the "central" repo (crash, buy-out,
sabotage, needing a project fork) cannot cause chaos: a new "central"
repo is designated- essentially an instant failover.
Cheers,
M
