On Saturday 24 January 2004 16:29, Kurt Lieber wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:43:05PM +0100 or thereabouts, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > I think that indeed subversion is superior to CVS, especially on the part > > where you want to look at changesets and merging. Maybe we could test > > subversion, but we might want to wait until the 1.0 version is released > > for actual use (is going to be rather soon now) > > As Chris mentioned, we were talking about this over dinner yesterday. For > now, cvs is what we will be using for the main repository as it has proven > to be mostly stable, if lacking in some features that we want/need. > > If we want to look at other solutions (subversion, arch, etc.) that's fine > -- I just want to test them on less critical repositories. Then, if/when > they have proven to be stable, scalable and in line with what we need, we > can think about moving gentoo-x86 over to it.
Let me stress that I did not want to suggest a move to subversion currently. It should be very well tested. Last time I tried subversion was not well able to handle the required amount of files/bytes. I'm all in favour of testing first, and then gradually implementing. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
pgp00000.pgp
Description: signature
