Agenda

[Mike Hearn]

Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> A bit of a hot topic, isn't it? It boils down to such questions as 
> "should the current revision control mechanism be replaced"?

Actually no. I'm setting up a gateway at the moment that should let 
people get most of the benefit without any changes to WineHQ.

To get the full benefit yes we'd have to switch HQ over to Subversion, 
which isn't a huge or difficult change but does require some work and 
Newman/Julliard have to be convinced of the benefits first. So the 
gateway will do for now.

I'll post more about this gateway once I've got it set up and used it 
myself for a bit.

> Come to think of it, I'm for it. Having somewhere I can commit stuff 
> that is "in progress", and not "Alexandre ready" would be really nice. 
> Having it publicly available, so other people can see and comment would 
> be great.

Yep, well the idea behind distributed version control is you can branch 
HQ and then commit to your local branch, and maybe publish your own tree 
somewhere. I'll be experimenting more with all this in the next few 
months leading up to WineConf.