> From: Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], bug-make@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:57:20 -0400 > > On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 21:10 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Can you tell why? > > The main reasons are lack of functionality in CVS re renaming, removing, > and reorganizing files. However, it's not a critical issue; I've lived > with it for this long. The other problems CVS has (poor branch/merge, > no atomicity, server-only repositories, etc.) are not as big a problem > for a project the size of GNU make.
Then perhaps you don't need to switch at all. Doing so will require a non-trivial effort; I don't know how your free time, but mine is hardly enough to try debugging an occasional w32-related bug report. Is it really worth wasting what few resources we have on switching to another VCS? > Another reason others have mentioned is making it simple for > "downstream" folks to work on make. Ideally I'd be happy to hand over > maintenance of the non-POSIX ports (for example) to others more > completely, and just pull from their changed trees. Why not give those who do work on non-POSIX ports write access to the CVS tree? > It looks like (as someone else mentioned) SVN may be supported on > Savannah "soonish". So another option is to wait for that. I certainly > don't want to switch more than once, if I do decide to switch. SVN certainly sounds as easier for use on Windows than GIT. _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
