Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:22:31 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: BK kernel workflow |
| |
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:10:47AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I doubt arch is there today either, but hey, if it displaces CVS, I > certainyl won't complain. How are the gcc people doing with it?
gcc people are stuck with CVS AFIK. Apparently CVS is good enough for them.
arch isn't ready for prime time with the kernel. It would be ready if we were ok to limit it to say 5000 changesets and to obsolete the older changesets once in a while. the backend needs a rewrite to handle that.
Thanks to various improvements we did (I only did one that allows caching with hardlinked trees, Chris and others did more), probably arch would be already way faster than BK in a daily checkout checkin and cloning (nobody on the open source side can verify since we cannot use BK, AFIK Miles tried to buy a copy of BK but Larry refused to sell it, but I seriously doubt BK has such an advanced hardlinking cache mechanism like arch), but the very first setup on a new machine would be very inefficient (if compared to CVS) and the local copy of the repository would take more space (again if compared to CVS).
The user interface isn't nice either, it'd be nicer at least to avoid overlaps between commands.
I believe this all can be fixed, it just needs a critical mass of users and some big initial pain. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |