Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-21 09:25:12
On 03/21/2012 02:15 PM, Philippe Vaucher wrote:
>> But as this discussion evolves, I get the impression that it gets overly
>> complicated when more than one public repository is involved.
> See how github.com handles it... I don't see what the problem is.
I am sorry to tell you that the described scenario is from using github :P
> There'd be one big central repository for boost, then a myriad of forks can
> exist if necessary and the maintainers would pick commits/patches from
> those forks as wanted.
Yeah ... right ... So those forks would be "private" public, right? What if,
if I as a user choose to not use the officiall repo, because it is not
maintained properly or because a feature is there i really care about, but
the maintainer doesn't want to integrate it properly.
I take it that those repositories would constantly rewrite history publicly?
How is that usable then?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk