Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Joel Miller <joelwmiller(at)sbcglobal(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync
Date: 2006-03-23 23:39:11
Message-ID: 4423319F.5040900@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>
>
>>Any particular reason why straight CVS doesn't work for you? Are you
>>that interested in having the log comment locally?
>>
>>
>
>Personally, I'd really like to have a local repository copy, because
>I spend a *lot* of time with cvsweb etc --- but I'm sure my needs are
>several standard deviations away from the mean. So far I've been
>discouraged from setting up a repository by the unreasonable
>infrastructure needs of cvsup. So these alternatives do sound pretty
>interesting.
>
>Is csup protocol-compatible with cvsup? If so people could use it
>without Marc having to do anything. Has anyone got experience with
>it --- reliability, performance, etc?
>
>
>
>

Tom,

I don't know what unreasonable infrastructure you are referring to.
Building cvsup is a major pain, but installing and running it isn't, in
my experience. There's a package in Fedora Extras. Setting up cvsweb
against my cvsup repo is a fine idea - I wonder why I didn't think of that.

That's not to say that supporting cvsync isn't a good idea too.
TIMTOWTDI as we perl people like to say.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-03-23 23:39:23 Re: Did this work in earlier version of Postgres?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-23 23:38:49 Re: Did this work in earlier version of Postgres?