[Controversial] Developper only CVS sandbox

[Alexandre Julliard]

"Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun at rogers.com> writes:

> We could start the tree off of an official release of Wine
> as a vendor branch, but it's still gonna be a lot of work
> to maintain. Is it worth the effort? I don't know...
> 
> I can try to do it, I have quite a bit of CVS experience,
> but it may prove too much of a pain. But before we do anything,
> I'm curious what Alexandre thinks.

Well, I don't think it would make much difference for me, so I don't
really care either way (as long as you don't start sending me URLs
instead of patches...)

I'm not convinced that it would really help all that much though; CVS
is not good at managing parallel lines of development, and the extra
work needed to maintain that tree probably offsets the gains in
sharing patches. In fact it's probably easier for developers who need
to share code to each maintain a local CVS tree on their machine and
use that to generate incremental diffs. At least this way there's no
need to setup a server, manage user accounts, etc.

Of course the real solution would be to switch to a source control
system with better support for parallel branches of development. Now
*that* should be a good flamewar topic <g>

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com