DVCS vs. Subversion brittleness (was Re: Moving to D)

[Russel Winder]

On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 14:51 +0000, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
[ . . . ]
> That stuff about DVCS not having a central repository is another thing 
> that is being said a lot, but is only true in a very shallow (and 
> non-useful) way. Yes, in DVCS there are no more "working copies" as in 
> Subversion, now everyone's working copy is a full fledged 
> repository/clone that in technical terms is peer of any other repository.
> However, from an organizational point of view in a project, there is 
> always going to be a "central" repository. The one that actually 
> represents the product/application/library, where the builds and 
> releases are made from. (Of course, there could be more than one central 
> repository if there are multiple kinds of releases like 
> stable/experimental, or forks of the the product, etc.)

Definitely the case.  There can only be one repository that represents
the official state of a given project.  That isn't really the issue in
the move from CVCS systems to DVCS systems.

> Maybe the DVCS world likes the term public/shared repository better, but 
> that doesn't make much difference.

In the Bazaar community, and I think increasingly in Mercurial and Git
ones, people talk of the "mainline" or "master". 

-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at russel.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20110216/ac06ec41/attachment.pgp>