On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 09:30:09AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > I haven't seen any particular reason why we should adopt another SCM. > > Perhaps BitKeeper or SubVersion would be better for our purposes than > > CVS, but are they enough better to justify the switchover costs? > > BitKeeper ist not open source, so it's out of the question for most > people.
Why? I understood that using BitKeeper for free for Open Source projects is allowed. (but IANAL). It is available (on many platforms). It works great. Once you use changesets you'll never want to go back to cvs. Producing an Open Source product does not mean that all tools are Open Source. Windows isn't and Postgresql is going to support windows. -- __________________________________________________ "Nothing is as subjective as reality" Reinoud van Leeuwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xs4all.nl/~reinoud __________________________________________________ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
