Curtis Olson wrote: > Here's another "for what it's worth" ... > > I was able to find a set of options to the cvs2svn tool that worked for > our repository. The FlightGear repository takes about an hour and 45 > minutes to convert. So that part works well. I also really like how > svn handles group and user authentication ... it does it outside of the > unix account system which makes the system much easier to manage. But I > am headed out of town here in a few minutes so I didn't want to rush to > set up a server daemon and then overlook something from a security > standpoint. > > From the standpoint of taking small steps, I think it makes sense to > migrate towards svn, and then we can still keep the git discussion open > as a separate issue. > I think this is a reasonable compromise. While I think that git is great and that the Windows client issues will be non-issues soon, there is good support in git for interacting (bi-directionally) with SVN repositories. I believe that git-svn will, given the same command line options, always generate the same sha1 hash for an SVN commit, so people who want to pull patches from other developers' git repositories should be able to do that without too much trouble.
Tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
