D Programming Language source (dmd, phobos, etc.) has moved to github

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir at thecybershadow.net> wrote in message 
news:op.vpxqmbpftuzx1w at cybershadow.mshome.net...
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 23:22:34 +0200, Don <nospam at nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:33:35 +0200, Don <nospam at nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think this is a fallacy. It only applies if you
>>>> (1) *completely disallow* any centralisation -- which I don't think 
>>>> ever happens in practice!
>>>  What about the Linux kernel? There's Linus's git repo, and lots of 
>>> repos maintained by others (e.g. Linux distros). The other distros are 
>>> not a superset of Linus's repo, they have their own branches with 
>>> various project-specific patches and backports. Git was written for 
>>> this specifically.
>>
>> Yes, but each distro has a trunk, in which all commits are ordered by 
>> time. There's always an official version of every branch.
>
> Ordered by time of what? Time of merging into the branch? That's not very 
> useful, is it?

Why wouldn't it be? It didn't exist in that branch befoe, and then it was 
added to that branch.  "Feature X was introduced in Version 2.31 and didn't 
exist in the 1.x line. But then Feature X was backported to the 1.x line at 
time Y / revision Y, which was right after we fixed 1.x's bug A and right 
before we fixed 1.x's bug B". What's wrong with that? Seems perfectly 
sensible to me.