[LLVMdev] Open Source Contributions

Chris Lattner sabre at nondot.org
Wed May 5 11:05:02 PDT 2004

On Wed, 5 May 2004, Oscar Fuentes wrote:

> Vladimir Prus <ghost at cs.msu.su> writes:
> > Why do you really need distributed development? The possible problems with
> > centralized development are
> > 1. The server might be often down.
> > 2. There's too much number of active branches, so nobody understand what's
> > going on.
> > 3. You can't commit while you're on a plane.
> Replace 3 with "You have no permanent internet connection, or you are
> behind a firewall, so you can not access the server at all (no diffs,
> no logs, nothing)".

And #4: it makes permissions on the server much easier to deal with.

> BTW, before considering arch too seriously, you should check how
> mature/stable it is. Last time I heard about it, Tom Lord was pleading
> for help and funding to finish Arch.

Yes, I think that Tom Lord is the single biggest problem with Arch.  :)
OTOH, Arch is now a gnu project, so perhaps its better now.  I any case,
everything that I know about it is dated.  :)

> OTOH, Subversion is just a sane CVS. No distributed repositories.
> With CVS, some people keep a copy of the main repository on their
> local computers. That's what some gcc developers do. They rsync from
> time to time with the remote repository. I don't know how serious
> the incoveniences are with this approach.

Yeah, that's a solution, but it's such a hack!  :)

> BitKeeper, due to its license, is a no-no, IMHO.




More information about the llvm-dev mailing list