Re: svn or arch

[Enrico Scholz]

walters@xxxxxxxxxx (Colin Walters) writes:

>> CVS can not replace SRPM:
>
> Note that I was talking about prerequisites for changing to a better
> revision control system, not how our current system is flawed.  But I'll
> answer anyways:
>
>> - SRPM can be signed, CVS not
>
> Right; this is solved directly in pretty much all the distributed
> RCSes.

How? Signing the data-transfer can not be compared with SRPM signing. The
on-disk data could be changed but the data-stream would be still valid.


>> - SRPM give you reproducibility, CVS not
>
> Not true if you can map NVR->CVS tag.

You do not know if somebody renamed the tag between two checkouts.


>> - SRPM are buildable with system-tools (rpmbuild); for CVS you need lots
>>   of prerequisites.
>
> Not necessarily.  We could just stick the necessary scripts in the
> common/ dir or whatever.  Or just include the necessary tools in an
> updated rpmbuild.

You will still need online-access. SRPMS can be used offline.



Enrico

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list