My own vote on it was going to be -1, for basically the same reason everyone else voted +0. There is just no reason for us to want to move to subversion.
But, since we're apparently not being given a choice, I suggest we move to subversion after finalizing the 2.0 branch. Since branching and tagging is different/problematic (using the eclipse plugin anyway), I'd prefer to do a last merge from 2.0 => HEAD using CVS + eclipse, and then we can move to subversion and figure out how to release 2.1. I vote +1 on this. -Mike On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 14:19, Peter Lin wrote: > so the bottom line is we have to migrate off CVS to subversion. I'm > pretty busy these days, but I'll try to make time to play with > subversion in the next few weeks. my hesitation is primarily due to > lack of experience and familiarity with subversion. > > I'm just stuck in the mud of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" :) > > peter > > > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:07:42 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I probably need to provide a bit more context :) > > > > The Infrastructure guys are looking to get us off CVS by some point. I > > wouldn't be surprised if the ASF is 50% in SVN already. So trying to > > avoid SVN is probably going to be increasingly hard as this year > > progresses. > > > > The existing CVS repository would be migrated, with > > tags/branches/comments all intact. Generally SVN on the client side is > > exactly the same as CVS. Most of the commands are the same. The only > > major difference is in tagging/branching; where the 'svn copy' command > > is used. In SVN you don't usually tag/branch individual files, you > > tag/branch the directory. > > > > Client-side support is good now. OS X binaries exist; the Eclipse > > plugin works fine (though maybe not for tagging/branching; ymmv). > > Intellij has a plugin and the next version will come with SVN plugged > > in automatically. > > > > Most importantly, there are a lot of improvements over CVS. > > http://subversion.tigris.org/ contains a description that is probably > > better than my particular favourites. > > > > I'm happy to assist with the migration planning etc, though if there's > > someone familiar with svn here already I'd prefer to let them handle > > things. All that really means is organising thoughts on how to > > structure the svn side of things (more on that later), sending the > > request to the infra guys for a test version to look at and then > > deciding if the test was good. > > > > Hen > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Apache Software Foundation --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
