[oe] Reconsidering the work flow and how the SCM system fits in

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 01:40 +0200, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:12:21 -0700 Tim Bird <tim.bird at am.sony.com> wrote:
> > Just a data point...
> > Sony uses git as its in-house SCM for Linux-related work.
> 
> Well, that's no wonder. Linux uses git, so everyone who does Linux
> development uses git. But now people think that: 1) if Linux kernel
> uses it, that everyone else must use it; 2) just as for many years
> before people have been thinking that there's no other SCM except CVS
> which can do better, then now they think there's no other DSCM except
> GIT which can do better. 
> 
> The last similarity is very striking, and let's just hope that we won't
> have reasons to say something like "hopefully we can agree CVS is a
> pretty bad SCM and that proves said entities don't know what
> they're doing" in regard to GIT.

In 10 years time we probably will have a better alternative. Thats fine,
my computer is a bit different to the one I had 10 years ago too.

Here and now, CVS is bad, git has a lot of positives.

How about we goes back to the discussion at hand? Technical merits of
git vs. hg or votes for not switching.

Cheers,

Richard