Re: control toolbox - time delays

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 10 January 2013 18:29, Lukas Reichlin
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Mercurial would be a good idea, IMHO. Especially because the current
> SVN web interface sucks, the one we had until a few months ago was
> much better for browsing and comparing code (IIRC ViewVC) and one
> could download directories as .tar.gz archives for installation.

Lukas, the idea would be to create one hg repo per OF package and
manage them with something like the default hgweb or Rhodecode:

    http://demo.rhodecode.org/

But then branches of the control package would both be within the same
hg repo. The hg web interface allows you to get tarballs of a specific
branch, e.g.

    Stable branch tarball for core Octave repo
    http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/archive/57046e0a9fb5.tar.gz

    Tarball for classdef branch
    http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/archive/8521321604df.tar.gz

You can also browse the code with hg, not sure if you like the style
or not:

    Default style:
    
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/file/8521321604df/src/mkoctfile.in.cc#l1

    gitweb style:
    
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/file/8521321604df/src/mkoctfile.in.cc?style=gitweb#l1

We can completely customise the web look if we want to.

At any rate, let me know if any of this looks better than what you're
currently using with svn and you're not afraid to learn a new VCS
(AIUI, you're new to hg, right?):

    http://hginit.com/

If so, I could give some priority to bringing hg to OF.

On 10 January 2013 18:28, Carnë Draug <address@hidden> wrote:
> When I said time cost, I meant my own at the moment. If someone else
> can do it, I will welcome the change.

Oh, I was offering my own time, of course, not yours.

- Jordi G. H.