>> My arguments in favor of SVN are: >> - switching from CVS is very easy > > You're clearly not the one who runs, uses or writes the scripts we have today > that use CVS. While easy to switch, it is still work and I this far I've found > other matters in my life mort important to spend that time and energy on. > I don't find CVS very awkward for our use.
I was only talking about the versionning system, not the tools that you use around CVS. Sorry this was not explicit enough. And of course, switching tools is another problem, and as I said I don't know them. >> - SVN+CMake+CDash may be a candidate tool chain > > We may change versioning system at some point but it might not be to SVN. And > we can provide the ability to build libcurl with cmake completely independent > of that. > > And I don't even know what CDash is... Well, I was talking about SVN because it's simply a "better CVS"; of course there are many other versionning systems. CDash allows you to store and display build results on a server. It's well integrated with CMake/CTest. See for example the report for OSG on the CDash public server: http://www.cdash.org/CDashPublic/index.php?project=OpenSceneGraph >> Conclusion: Why changing something that already works? Well... I think >> switching may be possible in the future, but not right now. > > I think that's pretty exactly what I've said. I know there are more advanced > tools - I am a contributor in at least two of those projects. Yep! I just wanted to add a few comments ;) Sincerely, -- Sukender PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/
