Oliver, One thing you should know is that MyFaces is technically supposed to be in SVN as a new Apache project. Apparently (according to people on the @infra list) this is a requirement for all new top level projects. (I wonder why the incubator is in CVS then?)
In addition to the fact that we're supposed to be on SVN there are maintenance advantages for us. Basically it took four weeks to get Stan Silvert his karma where Manfred could have done it in a single day. When we finally got @infra to help us we received the lecture about being on SVN. sean On 4/15/05, Thomas Spiegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 switch from CVS to Subversion > > On 4/15/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 on the switch > > > > -bd- > > > > On Friday, April 15, 2005, at 07:18AM, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > ><<Original Attached>> > > > > > > For all WIndows users: TortoiseSVN is a good choice. Give it a try. > > IntelliJ users: I'm currently evaluating build #3281 with integrated SVN > > support. No problem so far. > > > > Oliver, yes, tool support is better (manifold) for CVS. Not really > > astonishing keeping the age of CVS in mind. > > Anyway, the ASF has decided to switch from CVS to SVN and we should not be > > the blocker, IMHO. > > Is there a certain tool you have in mind, that has bad or no SVN support > > by now? > > > > -Manfred > > > > > > On 4/15/05, Oliver Rossmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > While subversion has it's merits > > > > > > -1 from me to switch to subversion at this point in time. > > > > > > We had this discussion a few times in the past and IMHO the most > > > important argument against svn has not changed until today: tool support > > > for subversion is far from what's available for CVS so this switch would > > > be a step back in developer productivity from my POV. And I hate these > > > stuipid long revision ids subversion uses as I'm not able to memorize > > > them for more than a minute's time ;-) > > > > > > As for source history: as far as I followed the discussions there will > > > be some moving/renaming of top-level directories in the myfaces module > > > so this can be done on filesystem level in the repository without > > > loosing history (same way as we did when migrating the sources from > > > sourceforge to ASF). This might be not that comfortable as it would be > > > using svn, but it can be done. > > > > > > Oliver > > > > > > Manfred Geiler wrote: > > > > > > >Final release 1.0.9beta is only a question of hours now. After > > > >publication will be the best time to finally move our repository out > > > >of the incubator. > > > >We have already discussed and voted about the SVN issue, but there are > > > >some new and changed circumstances and I would like to find out if > > > >there are still committers who have serious objection against SVN. > > > >Cons: > > > >- IntelliJ users still do not have integrated SVN support. > > > >Pros: > > > >- SVN is the new repository technology for ASF. At the long term all > > > >Apache projects should have moved to SVN. So it's unwritten common > > > >sense that new top level projects should start with SVN from the > > > >beginning. > > > >- As you know, SVN is able to keep history for renamed and moved files > > > >and dirs. Just now we are discussing some serious structural changes > > > >(subprojects, sandbox, etc.) If we do that now in CVS we would loose > > > >valuable history for many files. > > > >- TortoiseSVN is a powerful alternative for all IntelliJ users in the > > > >meantime. > > > > > > > >So here is my definite > > > >+1 for switching from CVS to Subversion > > > > > > > >-Manfred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Oliver Rossmueller > > > Software Engineer and IT-Consultant > > > Hamburg, Germany > > > http://www.rossmueller.com > > > > > > > > > > > > >
