As Dimi is not the only one that can start flames on wine-devel, let's start a new one :-)
Unfortunately your topic is not controversial enough. :-)
When I see the work that is starting to go on on D3D8 or even on my old D3D code, I think that it would be nice if there was some CVS 'sandbox' where Wine developper could interact on shared code without going the Alexandre round-trip. This would be much less painful than sending patches back and forth between developpers.
Makes sense.
This sandbox would be closed (ie it would be a developper only Wine tree) to NOT start another Wine fork and all development on this sandbox would be merged back in Wine when they are ready (and then would still go the Alexandre way of course).
Now, what does the Wine community think about this ? If people agree, what would be the best way to handle this ?
Obviously anybody that have the resources can setup a CVS server and give accounts to others.
So why discuss it at all. Do it yourself or if you lack the resources try to convice somebody that do to host it for you. If people think it is a good idea they will use it and if they want write access they will ask you for an CVS account. If not, well, I think you will notice the lack of intrest... :-)
In short: Action speaks louder than words.
BTW, Wine already have a SourceForge account http://sourceforge.net/projects/wine/ (registered by Dimitrie it seems).
Why not use it? SourceForge provides CVS access IIRC.
Unfortunately your topic is not controversial enough. :-)
Damn :-)
Obviously anybody that have the resources can setup a CVS server and give accounts to others.
Yeah, my plan was to find time and install a CVS server on my own box.
The problem is that 1) I do not have a lot of uplink bandwidth and 2) I hate CVS :-)
BTW, Wine already have a SourceForge account http://sourceforge.net/projects/wine/ (registered by Dimitrie it seems).
Why not use it? SourceForge provides CVS access IIRC.
Yes, but I do not know if they provide restricted CVS access.
Lionel
Le mer 25/09/2002 à 17:00, Lionel Ulmer a écrit :
Unfortunately your topic is not controversial enough. :-)
Damn :-)
Next time, add something about an automatic indentation program, or which text editor should be mandatory to hack on Wine. That'll do the trick :)
Obviously anybody that have the resources can setup a CVS server and give accounts to others.
Yeah, my plan was to find time and install a CVS server on my own box.
The problem is that 1) I do not have a lot of uplink bandwidth and 2) I hate CVS :-)
If you hate it, why do you want to use it then? :-)
BTW, Wine already have a SourceForge account http://sourceforge.net/projects/wine/ (registered by Dimitrie it seems).
Why not use it? SourceForge provides CVS access IIRC.
Yes, but I do not know if they provide restricted CVS access.
What do you mean by "restricted"? Read, or write access?
On SourceForge, as everywhere else, obviously write access is restricted to the project's developpers. And if you take the time to read some of their documentation, you'll notice that your CVS repositery must be publicly accessible to be hosted on SF.net. Of course, if it's not referenced anywhere outside, it'll be difficult to find it.
Vincent
Next time, add something about an automatic indentation program, or which text editor should be mandatory to hack on Wine. That'll do the trick :)
Ah yes... TAB sucks, four spaces rules ! (is it OK for a flame ?)
If you hate it, why do you want to use it then? :-)
Well, the problem is that I am spoiled by using ClearCase at work (it's pretty slow sometimes, but well, it's really powerful to manage parallel developments, something that would be equivalent to what I propose here).
What do you mean by "restricted"? Read, or write access?
Read AND write access. See my answer to Dimi's mail for the reason :-)
Lionel
Am Mit, 2002-09-25 um 23.28 schrieb Lionel Ulmer:
Well, the problem is that I am spoiled by using ClearCase at work (it's pretty slow sometimes, but well, it's really powerful to manage parallel developments, something that would be equivalent to what I propose here).
Here you have a good one for a flame (though really OT here, ought to go to alt.version-control.advocacy :-).
I am also forced to use CC and I openly confess I hate it more than my alarm clock. IMHO all the really productive features of CC are available with CVS as well, and the rest is excruciatingly slow bloat.
OK, everyone should be happy with their favorite VC system. I just couldn't resist to respond to that statement :-)
Martin
On September 25, 2002 05:00 pm, Lionel Ulmer wrote:
Yes, but I do not know if they provide restricted CVS access.
I think it's a great idea, even if for the fact that this way the changes I make are not sitting on my HD, without backup.
Plus, this way, I can commit _small_ changes in CVS, as I like to do, rather than batch them all, which makes finding bugs very, very difficult.
Let's not reinvent the wheel, SF is here, allows restricted write access which is all we need.
<plug>And with the great new ChangeSet scripts, we can just send pointers to Alexandre to "pull" stuff from this tree, just like Linus does with BitKeeper :P </plug>
I think it's a great idea, even if for the fact that this way the changes I make are not sitting on my HD, without backup.
Yup, another nice side-effect.
Let's not reinvent the wheel, SF is here, allows restricted write access which is all we need.
No, I *insist* on restricted read access. The reason is that Wine has already too many public forks. Let's not confuse things further by adding yet another one. Imagine the mess if D3D or any other 'sexy' feature is developped first on this tree and this goes to /. or any other news site... You will see, all the clueless users will go check out this tree even if it's labelled 'for developpers only' in big red letters :-)
For me, this tree would only be a stepping stone for developments, people should never check out the whole tree, only the interesting parts for them (for example, the dlls/ddraw directory) and work with the 'normal' Wine for the rest of the files (or with labellized files).
Lionel
On September 25, 2002 05:33 pm, Lionel Ulmer wrote:
No, I *insist* on restricted read access. The reason is that Wine has
After 30 min of sleep, I'm not that hot about this no more... The problem with SF is that we can't install our commit hooks, for the ChangeSet features.
We could start the tree off of an official release of Wine as a vendor branch, but it's still gonna be a lot of work to maintain. Is it worth the effort? I don't know...
I can try to do it, I have quite a bit of CVS experience, but it may prove too much of a pain. But before we do anything, I'm curious what Alexandre thinks.
"Dimitrie O. Paun" dpaun@rogers.com writes:
We could start the tree off of an official release of Wine as a vendor branch, but it's still gonna be a lot of work to maintain. Is it worth the effort? I don't know...
I can try to do it, I have quite a bit of CVS experience, but it may prove too much of a pain. But before we do anything, I'm curious what Alexandre thinks.
Well, I don't think it would make much difference for me, so I don't really care either way (as long as you don't start sending me URLs instead of patches...)
I'm not convinced that it would really help all that much though; CVS is not good at managing parallel lines of development, and the extra work needed to maintain that tree probably offsets the gains in sharing patches. In fact it's probably easier for developers who need to share code to each maintain a local CVS tree on their machine and use that to generate incremental diffs. At least this way there's no need to setup a server, manage user accounts, etc.
Of course the real solution would be to switch to a source control system with better support for parallel branches of development. Now *that* should be a good flamewar topic <g>
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Lionel Ulmer -
Martin Wilck -
Patrik Stridvall -
Vincent Béron