[crossfire] Crossfire Release Cycles/Methodology

[Alex Schultz]

Mark Wedel wrote:
>   As far as going to something else, I think it would have to be vastly better - 
> sourceforge provides a nice free environment - it keeps things very simple - it 
> is associated with a group, not a single person.
>
>   Something that is not free or associated with one person can become a problem. 
>   Suppose there is some cool site that provides a nice source control package 
> for a relatively nominal amount of money, and I'm willing to pay it.  That works 
> great unless I'm hit by a meteorite, and which time, that could just disappear 
> without anyone really knowing why (same points apply to services hosted on a 
> persons private computer, etc - it sounds reasonable, but if something happened 
> to that computer (house burns down), first priority for that person probably 
> isn't getting that server set up again).
For such reasons I would agree, we shouldn't go for something that is
not free, or associated with one person. My point was more saying that
perhaps it would be worth also evaluating the possibility of using some
other version control system such as bazaar-ng (personally I think
that's a pretty good one, however I don't think it would be a great idea
for cf, largely because it becomes rather slow with source trees as
large as crossfire, but I was just primarily using that as an example).
Personally I currently think that either SVN or CVS are the best options
for crossfire, but I just wanted to make a point that other options are
worth looking at a little too.
In terms of hosting, that is an issue for use of other, the metalforge
server may or may not work (don't know if Leaf would or not), however
that too has a little bit of those "associated with one person"
potential issues, though it is less significant. One thought, is
distributed version control systems would make "associated with one
person" issues less significant, thought it wouldn't eliminate those issues.

Alex Schultz