Re: Requiring SCM

Ehmm seems I'm mixing up SCM and SVC, sorry - Helgi On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 11:37 +0000, Helgi Þormar wrote: > Hi guys, > > Haven't you all been in the situation that you want to view the source > of X package but can't because the code is no where online except for > that .tgz that pearweb provides ? > Isn't that very frustrating ? IMHO it is very frustrating since we offer > free hosting of the source in the php.net CVS repo. > > Now what I want to propose is that we start requiring people to have the > code online someplace in a SCM repo, be it SVN/CVS (well we might want > to limit to those 2 ?) both so we can checkout the source when ever we > want and also view online via browser. > > There is no excuse not maintaining the source in SCM that's accessible > to everyone, especially since we have our very own CVS repo at > cvs.php.net which all PEAR developers can get access to if they like. > > For real, there is NO excuse for not having the code in SCM online, even > tho it's time consuming to maintain such thing but I think we'll get > greater quality on our packages and easier way to QA all packages (be it > manually or via some automate ways). > I mean I've gotten the response from certain PEAR devs (I'll name no > names) that they won't place the code for their package in a online repo > simply because there are no rules in PEAR that requires them to do so > which in turns hinders me to effectively help with the package/bug > fix/do QA on them. > > So what do you guys think ? Gimme ya thoughts on this! :-) > > - Helgi >