[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[AUCTeX-devel] Repository for RefTeX

From: Ralf Angeli
Subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Repository for RefTeX
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 00:02:19 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux)

So, I've played a bit with Arch; setting up repositories and working
dirs, branching, committing, merging.  The start was a little bumpy
due to mistakes I made out of unfamiliarity with the tool.  That might
not had been a problem, but some error messages weren't really
enlightening (one displayed some C code and the other one told me that
I could not merge unrelated trees when trying to merge stuff from the
trunk to a branch).  I also tried DVC and my impression is that in
day-to-day use (i.e. mostly committing changes) there won't be much of
a difference regarding the amount of effort to get work done between
CVS and Arch.  One real advantage of Arch is support for merging
changes between different repositories which would be useful for
synchronizing the RefTeX files in the Emacs and RefTeX repositories.
However, this will probably not be done very often and all the
differences between CVS and Arch both on a conceptual and on a
handling level will probably create more friction than we would gain
from the better merge support.  And, of course, there is the problem
of Arch not being supported on all platforms we'd wish it was.  So
consequently I'd opt for CVS.

Once we all agree on that we can start setting up the repository and
ask Savannah admins to copy RefTeX files from the Emacs repository
over to RefTeX's own.  So, does anybody else have reservations
regarding CVS as the version control system for RefTeX?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]