Boost logo

Boost :

From: Domenico Andreoli (cavokz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-06 13:00:38

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:33:16PM -0400, troy d straszheim wrote:
> in the previous thread,
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 08:49:14AM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > It depends where you're committing things. One of the best reasons
> > for branching in a traditional version control setup is to give
> > authors a place to check in their partially-finished (i.e. "broken")
> > work. That _improves_ results in numerous ways. Obviously, there has
> > to be some kind of check in the system for bad commits, but only those
> > that a library author declares to be "good," and thus, ready for
> > release.
> Since we're talking about devel vs. stable and what the meaning of
> 'trunk' really is, I found Linus Torvald's google tech talk on git
> (which is source control for the linux kernel) to be *very*
> interesting (fairly entertaining as well).
> He places a very high value on the ability to
> * branch at any time
> * merge easily
> * commit/branch/merge locally (not in the 'central' repository)
> Interesting the emphasis on git's being distributed... there is no
> 'central repository'.

yes, git is really powerful. it took some time to enter in my fingers,
but i am now wishing to have something to be heavvy branched/merged.. :)

i find it perfect for kernel development, but in many other contexts
you end to use it as super-doped cvs/svn (probably it is just me burned
with cvs/svn..).

moreover, it is not clear (to me) how it behaves under windows,
expecially with all those SHA1 digests and the crlf differences between
unix/windows worlds..


-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at