On Monday 26 February 2007 13:50, Robert Treat wrote:
> It's worth keeping in mind that one of the primary reasons we don't have a
> different usage pattern is because CVS makes such a thing painful.  Given
> how much of development is done now, I have a feeling that the community
> might well adopt a distributed development model and strongly benefit from
> it given a tool that makes it manageable, but CVS will certainly never give
> us that.

Well stated.

> > We have the opportunity to
> > wait and see what will emerge in the SCMS competition, and IMHO that's
> > what we should do.  There are many more-pressing things for us to spend
> > time on right now than an SCMS conversion.
> 100% Agreed.

I think SVN may provide a nicer migration path to the distributed SCMS simply 
because it supports the atomic changesets. At the very least, it could be a 
much shorter process than what the current conversion takes (about 3.25 hours 
on my laptop). Here's ([1]) another interesting bit.


Warren Turkal (w00t)

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to