As Clemens Koller wrote: > Maybe I missed some discussions but did you consider moving towards > Git as a distributed SCM tool?
Nobody ever brought that up when we discussed it previously (while switching to SVN has been requested). I don't see any real advantage either, although I confess I never got the hang of git. But where to stop then, why Git and not Mercurial instead? SVN is at least a logical choice as it comes with the smallest set of differences compared to CVS, so the amount of things to learn anew for developers who are used to CVS is fairly small. Before being in need for a distributed version control system, I think the project were in need for much more active developers first. I've been working on a project using centralized VCSes for many years, where there are several hundred developers with write access distributed worldwide (FreeBSD), but the centralized repository has never been a real bottleneck. (Active developers can always get a local copy of the repository by rsync if they want.) -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
