> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >
> > Also I talked with him that it would be nice we could have a kind of
> > distributed source repository to co-develop patches. The repository
> > would be a very short life one (until the patches are committed). What
> > I have in my mind is, creating a repository for that sake on pgfoundry
> > or whatever place to initialy import CVS head of pgsql then give
> > commit rights to those who wish to work on the patches. The committers
> > in my mind currently are Yoshiyuki, I, David Fetter, Gregory Stark and
> > Michael Makes (of course new volunteers are always
> > welcome). Periodically (once a week or so) I incorporate diffs from
> > pgsql CVS head then resolve conflicts if any.
> >
> > The most handy place for me to settle a CVS repository is:
> >
> > http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgpool/
> >
> > I know it's a little bit miss use but...
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
>
> Tatsuo-san,
>
> Would it not be better to use git for this purpose?
>
> See http://git.postgresql.org
As far as I can tell from the URL above to share foo's work,
1) foo publish his work to ~foo on git.postgresql.org
2) bar retrieve patches from 1) then apply to his own git braches.
I'm not sure this would improve existing method.
The method I propose would be something like this:
1) commit foo's work into the CVS repository.
2) bar does cvs update on his CVS working file.
It seems later method is easy to use. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> If not we can certainly create a short life pgfoundry project for you -
> that seems better than abusing the pgpool CVS repo just because you have
> control of it.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan