> The active committer community objected to the transfer of > dead code from cvs to svn, arguing that the Avalon svn > should contain the active alive code.
And that would have been wrong. SVN is our successor to CVS, and we are to PRESERVE *ALL* history of our code, which is an asset. > In my mind (and I'm not alone) this was the start of a fallout > between the chair, certain members of the board, and members of > the Avalon development community. I'm not on the Board, and I am one of the most vocal at insisting on absolute preservation of development history. --- Noel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]