Time to revisit this perennial favourite?

Do you feel that Rosegarden's current use of Subversion is an
advantage for the project, a disadvantage, or largely irrelevant?
Would any change attract more new developers, put off old developers,
both, or neither? (Please explain your reasoning!)

Note that I'm a fan of Mercurial (so much so that I work on a user
interface for it, http://easyhg.org) and would be inclined to suggest
using that, because:

 1. It's approachable for people who are used to Subversion
 2. But similar enough to git that it should work for people who are
"occasional users" of git, i.e. those who have to look up the syntax
whenever they try to do anything clever
 3. It feels native on Windows as well as on Linux
 4. It has a consistent interface and good help

But I'm well aware that I haven't been a major contributor during the
last couple of years, and that at least two of the people who have
(Tom and Ted) have referred to using git, while the main manager
(Michael) is more comfortable with Subversion.

Converting the repository retaining a sensible amount of history would
be tricky (RG svn history is a mess) but possible, and I could handle
it for Mercurial (but I wouldn't know how to for git).

So, what are your views? (I'm not trying to call for a vote -- rather
just call for opinions and get this out of the way while we're
thinking about development meta-questions.)


Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel

Reply via email to