From: "Mr. James W. Laferriere" <babydr@baby-dragons.com>
To: Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>
Cc: Linux Kernel Maillist <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: SCM file system (Was Re: Bitkeeper)
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 16:30:24 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0307191627200.3541@filesrv1.baby-dragons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030719161725.GD17587@mark.mielke.cc>
Hello Mark All , (I hate continuing this thread But) A thought
just (re-)occured to me that for those people who -really- need
it . What about an SCM file system ? Thoughts , anger ,
complancency ? Twys , JimL
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 05:00:24PM +0100, John Bradford wrote:
> > > Any investment into writing a new source management
> > > system would be better served by improving the linux source code.
> > What happens if somebody develops a really good versioned filesystem
> > for Linux, would it not get merged, because the linux kernel would
> > then contain SCM-like functionality?
> One day, when it happens, we'll see what ripple effects it has.
> In most cases, however, I suspect that a versioned file system will never
> be a replacement for a good source management system. The lines could become
> blurred, but the 'good versioned file system' might take the form a kernel
> module that allowed SCM systems to plug into it, at which point, Bit Keeper
> might plug into it, and everybody would be happy. I doubt you want to put
> merge manager functionality into the kernel, or many of the other components
> of a good source management system. The storage and access is one of the
> lesser concerns. Bit Keeper uses similar storage and access methods as
> SCCS, does it not?
--
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS |
| Network Engineer | P.O. Box 854 | Give me Linux |
| babydr@baby-dragons.com | Coudersport PA 16915 | only on AXP |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-19 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-19 16:00 Bitkeeper John Bradford
2003-07-19 16:17 ` Bitkeeper Mark Mielke
2003-07-19 20:30 ` Mr. James W. Laferriere [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.56.0307191627200.3541@filesrv1.baby-dragons.com \
--to=babydr@baby-dragons.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@mark.mielke.cc \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).