The NTP Project used no source code management for many years.
Eventually, we started using CVS, and that worked well for a while.
After a while, the limitations of CVS started driving Harlan crazy, and since he is the driver of the beast, he looked for a replacment. After about 2 more YEARS of study and looking, he chose BitKeeper and has been very happy with it ever since.
In early 2005, it was announced that BitMover would be stopping its free use license for BitKeeper.
While we are looking to continue on using the commercial version of BitKeeper, people have been asking about evaluating a replacement for BitKeeper.
Requirements
The SCM must be invisible to Dave Mills
its use must not require any signature from anybody at UDel for its use there
it must support file and directory renames
it must support tracking of file/directory permission attribute changes
it should support checkins for work-in-progress
it must support the functionality we have with the existing triggers, described in the BitKeeper/triggers/trigger.cfg file of any ntp-dev or ntp-stable repo, which execute the following scripts:
it must easily support ntp-stable and ntp-dev repositories, and pulling changesets from ntp-stable to ntp-dev, and should support pulling changesets from ntp-dev to ntp-stable
it must support integration areas
it must be robust, reliable, and easy to use
it must not be a pig
it must have useful merge support
it must have useful branch/LOD support
it must have an easy/useful way to find when changes were made
it must have a useful web interface
There are probably more, but this is the list off the top of my head. Oh, please also see
MaintainerIssues#How_to_work_on_a_bug for how I like to handle dealing with patches and things.
If you would prefer to add your comment below instead of editing the table above, please do so. You can also email your comments to webmaster@ntp.org .
One of the major gripes with P4 amoungst the FreeBSD userbase is the utter lack of decent support for anonymous r/o checkouts. In this respect, switching to perforce would make "public" access to ntp's development source much worse than it is now. -- TWikiGuest - 06 Dec 2005 15:27:22
Here's my first pass...
Please comment below or edit above, as appropriate.
-- HarlanStenn - 09 May 2005
This topic: Dev > WebHome > SourceCodeManagement
Topic revision: r10 - 2007-12-21 - 14:56:47 - SteveKostecke