On May 4, 2005, at 3:44 , Florent Guillaume wrote:
Well it would make things homogenous with the rest of Zope and
Zope-related projects. And you could do checkouts of Zope + CMF or Plone
+ CMF or CPS + CMF with only a few well placed svn:externals in one

You're slightly contradicting yourself here. It's not "the rest of Zope and Zope-related products" that are on SVN. It's only Zope 2.8+, Plone stuff and CPS. I would claim the opposite and say that most Zope-related products are still on CVS, and a few large ones (especially Plone/Plone-related products and CPS) are on SVN.

And frankly merging and cheap branches and having diff -r PREV:BASE
makes svn much nicer to use day to day.

Haven't had any problem doing branches and diffing in CVS, that's a purely subjective observation.

The cvs2svn script is quite mature, migrating is not difficult in
itself, and ZC has already done it for Zope.

That's unrelated to my original opinion, really.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to diss anyone, it's just that I haven't seen many "valid" arguments for such a move that really benefit most active developers. At least for Zope itself there were a couple good arguments if I remember correctly, but they had to do with Zope repository specifics (stitching in unrelated stuff etc).

Now, if there was zero cost to switching, fine. I can deal with having to get further into SVN. But there is a cost, especially for those people who do the repository migration and then presumably cleanup. You're "force-volunteering" people at ZC right now to do that work. They should have the final word, if anyone.


Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org

See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to