[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [parted-devel] Re: Parted 2.0 plans

From: Leslie P. Polzer
Subject: Re: [parted-devel] Re: Parted 2.0 plans
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:17:29 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060728)

Otavio Salvador wrote:

Anything is inferior to darcs regarting to merging capability.

 - git / cogito
Those are the only ones I haven't checked out more closely, yet.
Might be too complex for Parted.

 - bzr (bazaar-ng)
IMHO too complicated.

 - darcs
Well, I'm obviously for this one :)

 - svn / svk
I used this for distributed work, but it feels like a kludge and
probably is.  Also, the dependencies of svk are horrible.

Personally I prefer bzr, git or darcs.
The only alternatives that seem to be acceptable besides darcs
are monotone and Mercurial.

Debian Installer does it. We have a parted_server that has every
command queued there and then when the user ask it, it saves
everything together. Might help here.
Where can we get it?  Will it integrate well?

It's how d-i uses parted and might be a start code to check.

Will take a look at it soon.

po4a is the way I found to allow people to translate the manpages and
gettext cannot do that.
Alright, let's see whether we can get that po4a stuff into good shape
(configure checks and the ability to turn it off is a must) for


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]