[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS
From: |
Jason Cater |
Subject: |
Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS |
Date: |
Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:12:10 -0600 |
I would not mind going to a subversion system on ash.gnuenterprise.org.
The benefits:
* We can admin our own tree/server; so, when something goes wrong,
the "buck stops here", as the quote goes.
* Subversions would be easier to maintain from what I understand.
The disadvantages:
* Someone will have to convert our tree over, maintaining its history. I
can do this over the holidays if no one has done it before as I have 2
weeks off at the end of the year.
* CVS is fairly universal. A lot of tools/platforms readily support it.
Is this true of subversion? How is windows support? Does anyone know of
a read-only SUBVERSION-to-CVS gateway so we could still offer anonymous
cvs checkouts?
What advantages does staying with subversions.gnu.org provide versus
moving to our own server?
-- Jason
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:58:18 +0100
Jan Ischebeck <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as Savannah is down at the moment and development of GNUe shouldn't
> stand still for too long, I want to ask you all about your opinions on
> two issues:
>
> 1. Is everybody content with the cvs repository on subversions.gnu.org
> or should we consider any other revision control system like
> subversion, arch ...
>
> 2. Even if we don't decide to change, what could be a temporary
> solution? (f.e. deciding to send patches to address@hidden would be
> a way)
>
> I'm not very content with CVS and would like to switch to something
> more advanced. Having something like arch would IMHO the best
> solution, as it would allow us to have a tree on savannah and on ash,
> which would stay in sync automatically. Syncing two private tree with
> arch is easy too. Nevertheless does the loss in time developing gnue
> itself caused by such a change should be left unconsidered.
>
> BUT now, after we have no chance to keep up anymore in terms of cvs
> commit frequency (measured by the CIA daemon), I don't see any reason
> in continue using CVS DOT
>
> Jan :)
>
> --
> Jan Ischebeck <address@hidden>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnue-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnue-dev
>
- [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Jan Ischebeck, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, James Thompson, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS,
Jason Cater <=
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Warren Turkal, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, James Thompson, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Warren Turkal, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Jason Cater, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Dave Fancella, 2003/12/12
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Jan Ischebeck, 2003/12/14
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Warren Turkal, 2003/12/14
- Re: [GNUe-dev] Savannah and CVS, Reinhard Mueller, 2003/12/14