Re: [Tinycc-devel] What's the newest release of TCC? is it still in 0.9.23 released since 2004?

[Rob Landley]

On Tuesday 24 July 2007 6:42:31 pm David A. Wheeler wrote:
> Rob Landley:
> > The most recent reemergence of this concept was:
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/tinycc-devel/2007-05/msg00139.html
> >
> > And I've barely touched my tree since then.  (It usually takes me at
> > least three months to regain interest when this happens, and this time
> > I'm busy enough with other things it may take much longer.)
>
> Hmm, my intent was to let you keep going while using Hg - so you wouldn't
> need to use CVS - while letting people who pull from CVS to keep pulling
> doing so.

I point out that you can get a tarball of any version through the hg web 
interface, but oh well.

> All I intend to do is pull changesets from your Hg tree into 
> CVS, as you make changes to your Hg branch.... NOT to _maintain_ the stuff
> in CVS.

If people start checking stuff into CVS that isn't already in my tree, it's an 
amazing pain for me to extract that change, far more than it is if they 
posted it to the list.

This threat has sort of receeded, but making CVS relevant again brings it back 
to the surface.  It also brings back the "your tree isn't good enough, only 
this other tree over here is real" bit.

> That way, people who currently pull from CVS can keep doing so, and 
> the CVS can can act as the "backup" in case your server goes down/away
> (that happened a few months ago).

If anyone, anywhere has done an "hg clone" on my tree, they have a complete 
backup of the entire history.  This is how mercurial (or any other modern 
decentralized source control system, including git) works.

> I've been sending patches to you, and 
> telling others to do the same.  So just keep modifying tcc using Hg, as you
> want to; you have a more active tree. The whole point was to let you keep
> making modifications as you see fit!

Last time Fabrice regained interest he checked something into CVS that was 
never posted to the list.  I don't want to stand in his way if he regains 
interest again, but I'm not pulling another patch out of CVS.

> I got pulled off on some other work,

Join the club.  I just got back from california, we pick up a moving truck 
tomorrow, fill it up, head to austin, and from there I fly to Michigan for a 
week (and will probably be completely offline for that).

The past two months has been kind of crazy...

> which is why I haven't pulled 
> Changesets into CVS yet.  But I still intend copy your tree into CVS (with
> history of changes, modulo CVS limits).  But the point was so that you can
> keep making changes using Hg, without needing to touch CVS.

I currently don't "need" to touch CVS, and have no intention of getting any of 
it on me.  However, CVS is somehow special and needs to be touched even if I 
don't do it.  My tree stands in the shadow of the CVS tree, because the CVS 
tree is the real one, even when it's not updated.  I've come to terms with 
this, but it means that playing with my tree is a meaningless thing I do 
solely for my own amusement, or because I'm explicitly asked to.

Don't mind me, I'm jetlagged and moving...

> --- David A. Wheeler

Rob
-- 
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
  - Ken Thompson.