Am 28.06.2008 um 21:45 schrieb Andreas Raab:

> Colin Putney wrote:
>> On 28-Jun-08, at 5:27 AM, Claus Kick wrote:
>>> If push comes to shove, I would even say, lets ditch them all and  
>>> just use SVN like the rest of the planet (if that is possible). It  
>>> is hard enough to sell a image-based language with a real IDE to  
>>> the C-style crowd, the package  management systems should not add  
>>> their grain of salt to the soup.
>> Been there, done that... <shudder/>
>> Monticello was created because this turned out not to be feasible  
>> in practice.
>
> Can you say something more about that? A couple of weeks ago I saw a  
> demo at HPI in Potsdam where students used SVN down to the method  
> level, and it seemed to me that this approach might very well work  
> because the SVN granularity is the same as the in-image granularity.  
> It may also be interesting that this wasn't even trying to deal with  
> source files of any sort - it retained the nature of the image and  
> simply hooked it up directly with SVN. From my perspective this  
> looked like an extraordinarily interesting approach that I am  
> certain to try out as soon as it is available.


Do you think it would be feasible to exclusively manage an image from  
SVN sources?

The reason I'm asking is related to the "image" problem I reported  
earlier, the Linux folks demand the image to be to bootstrapped from  
sources + media files. Which IMHO would be a major re-engineering  
effort. E.g.,

http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-June/015868.html

which is even one of the nicer emails in the thread, there were openly  
hostile posts, too.

- Bert -