Keeping SVN is a mistake given what has been demonstrated by GNA's failure. SVN gives us a single point of failure. A DVCS would eliminate that problem.
I agree with flattening the structure. GC On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 3:53 AM, Riccardo Mottola <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On 02/13/12 20:45, Amr Aboelela wrote: >> >> Why don't we make voting about moving to git? >> >> Do you want to move to git? >> >> Pls answer yes or no. >> >> My answer is: YES > > Well, but sharply, my answer is NO. > > O prefer a trusted, portable version control and not entangle in some sort > of featuritis war. > > However, we still need a way to solve the current impasse. Personally > I'dtake the occasion to move back to savannah, which would consolidate our > "gnu.org" status, keep SVN but flatten out our structure. I never liked us > being on gna, so even less on github. > Otherwise an alternative is sourceforge: I have PRICE's CVS there since 9 > years and never had failure, they have real sysadmins I guess... > > We need to wait for gna.org to come back up (it still isn't) and also see in > which state the repository is. Our history is a valuable thing (which we > should try to keep if we migrate). Lat time savannah of nongnu failed, the > CVS repo was a mess! > > Riccardo > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep -- Gregory Casamento Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa (240)274-9630 (Cell) http://www.gnustep.org http://heronsperch.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
