>
> > Something like this is easily done in GIT as well:
> > git fetch ## Fetch any new commits done in the origin to the local repo
> > git merge origin/master ## or any other branch you want..
> > git push ## publish your work for others to fetch
>
>
> I would very much like to start using GIT to do this. The main difference is
> that when a contributor wants to merge back the changes from upstream GIT
> knows which changes upstream correspond to the commits the contributor made.
> So it can avoid a lot of conflicts when the upstream version has subsequent
> changes to the same areas.
>
> The end result is also a lot cleaner. Instead of a lot of commit messages that
> just say "applying patch from Foo" all the original separate commits can be
> preserved.
I don't stick to CVS at all. If contributors are comfortable, let's go
with GIT.
BTW, does this setting requrie a local GIT server be installed? If so,
that might be a problem for me since I don't have resource for that.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
No comments:
Post a Comment