[csw-maintainers] ITP: opencsw-policy

[Peter FELECAN]

Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> writes:

> Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski's message of Fri Dec 31 15:44:56 -0500 2010:
>
>> Swinging Ockham's razor, I'd think twice before I created any new
>> source repositories.  I'm already tempted to create new repositories
>> (for gar, for checkpkg), but I've been curbing these temptations.

Why do you resisted the temptation?

> Well, I'd like to keep things containerized if possible.  We already
> have quite the mingling of different things in the primary svn repo
> (gar, checkpkg, build recipes, sources for a few simple packages,
> etc).  IMO, each of the above should be a separate repo, but I
> understand why they're not.
>
> The policy documentation will be a large enough entity that it
> deserves it's own place to live, imo.
>
>> If we decide that we need a new source repository, it will probably
>> be git, unless there's a specific reason to use another VCS.  If you
>> create a new VCS, you need to make sure that it'll be reliable,
>> access-controlled, backed up and integrated with the rest of our
>> infrastructure.

I agree that having separate repositories for separate projects is a
good thing (just look at the size of the actual gar).

However, having many VCS types is a PITA. If we started with subversion
why change to git? Slowly all this will became a bazaar.

> We're using sourceforge for svn and relying on their backup.  We could
> do similar with one of github or gitorious (I use both already for a
> few things).  Also, with a distributed VCS, each checkout is a
> backup...although there is potential to lose a few commits if a local
> copy is lost before sharing the changes.

Is there a reason for which we cannot host our own repositories?
Especially if we use only one VCS and afferent tools.
-- 
Peter