From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JZpax-0001Wk-Vb for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:53 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JZpYq-00050C-16 for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:41:40 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:41:40 +0000 Received: from koen by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:41:40 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:41:32 +0100 Message-ID: References: <47D71B8F.1030108@balister.org> <20080313101513.3e72ca08@widy.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213) In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on serenity X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Git versus Hg X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:43:54 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Cliff Brake schreef: | I still maintain that that tools do impact developer workflow, and | this should be a serious consideration when selecting tools. What is | the workflow that will maximize the productivity and output of the OE | community? The tool selection should follow. Having been through the bk->mtn switchover and the re-evaluation I noticed that people who said "I will start contributing (much more) to OE if you weren't using bitkeeper" didn't actually start contributing *at all*, so I'm extremely sceptical of the promised influx of a gazillion ISVs, OEMs, ODMs and users with a switch to hg/git/vss. All I can see is that the people taking care of the OE infrastructure (Mickey and me) will have to allocate some weeks to do a good changeover[1], and we both aren't known for our copious amounts of spare time that would be needed. regards, Koen [1] As it is, we were(are?) beginning the move of large parts of the existing infrastructure to a new machine, but that's put on hold[2] due to this discussion. [2] Yes, that's why you haven't seen any commits mails lately. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFH2UsrMkyGM64RGpERAlvcAJ92SgGXGs8amaDIN1ef+JAlxXtqmgCgqTkF 4vrvx1JEyVXseQRAp7D2w1o= =594a -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----