Monotone: Best practice for setting up an 'im.pidgin.adium' branch?

Ethan Blanton elb at
Mon Jan 12 16:37:43 EST 2009

Evan Schoenberg spake unto us the following wisdom:
> On Jan 6, 2009, at 11:59 AM, John Bailey wrote:
> > The rest of the proposal seems sound to me, but I personally would 
> > have no objections to just housing `im.pidgin.adium` on our mtn
> > server.  I already run a mirror of im.pidgin.* on,
> > which provides us a level of fault tolerance which you would gain for
> > free (effort-wise) as a result of this.
> If nobody else objects to this, that'd be great. It should very  
> minimally increase the database, if my understanding of how monotone  
> handles branches is right, since there are very few changes Adium  
> maintains separately.

I think it's a great idea, and I'm not concerned about its impact on
database size.

> Richard wrote:
> > Perhaps this should be com.adiumx.pidgin or similar? I don't have a
> > strong preference, though.
> I thought about something like that... but as what I'm thinking about  
> is much closer to a branch than to a fork, I thought using im.pidgin.*  
> made sense.  Does anyone have strong feelings either way?

Seems unimportant to me.  They're both valid names.  If we host it on, it might as well be im.pidgin.* so we don't have to fire up
an additional server or adjust our current services.


The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy
for evils].  They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor
determined to commit crimes.
		-- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the Devel mailing list