On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:06:09 -0500, Michael Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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.
I've got to watch my mouth here :) It's hard to make sure I'm not pressurising or under-reporting an issue when I'm being a middleman. The choice is completely there. I need to reword my aim of getting Jakarta into SVN this quarter to be the more realistic "getting all of Jakarta to consider SVN this quarter". There are some gains on the client-side, and some losses for tightly-focused IDE users (you lose synchronise repository functionality in Eclipse for example). The Infra guys have much more in the way of gains over losses, so from their point of view it's a much easier choice. That said, if the subcommunity has absolutely no interest in moving, it's a disservice if I make it look as though you're being pushed. I assume the time will come in a year or so when the infrastructure group start talking about wanting to get everyone out of CVS as there are so few left (and CVS is already in a minority), but things can wait until then. I'll start to maintain a list of "Want to stay in CVS for the near future", and the general response on this thread suggests I should put JMeter on it. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
