Well it is just a feeling - and I've had the same feeling. But you get used to it, and that "top layer" archive can be used as a _pivot_ branch, into which other developers can merge (or you can pull their changes into) and then from which you can pull/star merge back into your private archive.
When you see it that way, what is happening makes good sense really.
However, I believe "archive mirrors" does what you are trying to achieve. I haven't used them yet myself, since I need the pivot branch to work with my coworkers.
Having been turned to arch/tla (see my post above), my company purchased a support contract from "Seyza" (I don't think they actually have a web page yet), which is Tom Lord's company for providing these things wrt arch/tla. (I think emailing lord@emf.net is how I got in contact originally.)
There are (apparently) also others in the gnu-arch community who can and do provide arch/tla support contracts.
I used Bitkeeper for about two weeks, before being told that since I'd said this on the arch list: "I'd cringe if I had to use Bitkeeper", and because of my public pro-stance on free software (as they had researched from my homepage - http://www.souldound.net/), I was on their shitlist and they would not sell me, and therefore the company I currently work for, a license to use Bitkeeper.
Needless to say, I found this a little confronting, took stock of my temporary moral slip in even considering the use of proprietary software (forgive me Free Software gods), and promptly got stuck into arch/tla, which I've now been using for about a month.
In my experience, tla is more flexible - the design really does reach high, although the learning curve (at the moment at least) is a little higher for sure - you really do have to go read the tutorial, wiki, etc. I found the people on the gnu-arch-users@gnu.org mailing list to be very helpful though - even if personal/ power tiffs were going on, those involved never ceased to be supportive in replying to my questions.
Bruce Perens is leading the UserLinux project with the specific goal of creating a global "co-operative" if you like, of Debian GNU/Linux service provider companies (and consultants), with a completely Debian (ie. 100% Free Software) core. Additionally, the GNOME desktop has been standardized upon specifically to simplify custom/ proprietary development on top of UserLinux.
See the homepage.
The only thing might be the release-ready (version 1.0) timing; depends on your deployment timetable of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Oohhh scary - you won't be sold a license to particular proprietary piece of software. You must have done something wrong then hey!
Yes, that message is indeed the one they quoted at me.
And yes, my domain was meant to be soulsound.net.
Like, thanks,
Zenaan
Well it is just a feeling - and I've had the same feeling. But you get used to it, and that "top layer" archive can be used as a _pivot_ branch, into which other developers can merge (or you can pull their changes into) and then from which you can pull/star merge back into your private archive.
When you see it that way, what is happening makes good sense really.
However, I believe "archive mirrors" does what you are trying to achieve. I haven't used them yet myself, since I need the pivot branch to work with my coworkers.
good luck
zenaan
Having been turned to arch/tla (see my post above), my company purchased a support contract from "Seyza" (I don't think they actually have a web page yet), which is Tom Lord's company for providing these things wrt arch/tla. (I think emailing lord@emf.net is how I got in contact originally.)
There are (apparently) also others in the gnu-arch community who can and do provide arch/tla support contracts.
Good luck
Zenaan
I used Bitkeeper for about two weeks, before being told that since I'd said this on the arch list: "I'd cringe if I had to use Bitkeeper", and because of my public pro-stance on free software (as they had researched from my homepage - http://www.souldound.net/), I was on their shitlist and they would not sell me, and therefore the company I currently work for, a license to use Bitkeeper.
Needless to say, I found this a little confronting, took stock of my temporary moral slip in even considering the use of proprietary software (forgive me Free Software gods), and promptly got stuck into arch/tla, which I've now been using for about a month.
In my experience, tla is more flexible - the design really does reach high, although the learning curve (at the moment at least) is a little higher for sure - you really do have to go read the tutorial, wiki, etc. I found the people on the gnu-arch-users@gnu.org mailing list to be very helpful though - even if personal/ power tiffs were going on, those involved never ceased to be supportive in replying to my questions.
Hope that's a useful datapoint,
Zenaan
And, no karma for funny posts, so I hear...
cheers
zenaan
Bruce Perens is leading the UserLinux project with the specific goal of creating a global "co-operative" if you like, of Debian GNU/Linux service provider companies (and consultants), with a completely Debian (ie. 100% Free Software) core. Additionally, the GNOME desktop has been standardized upon specifically to simplify custom/ proprietary development on top of UserLinux. See the homepage. The only thing might be the release-ready (version 1.0) timing; depends on your deployment timetable of course.