Gentoo Archives: gentoo-doc

From: "Jan Kundrát" <jkt@g.o>
To: gentoo-doc@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-doc] svn vs cvs
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:26:26
Message-Id: 44DEFDF7.40203@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-doc] svn vs cvs by Sven Vermeulen
Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> I wouldn't mind to move over to SVN personally. Just Another Versioning > Tool. But I do hope that SVN (don't know it really) supports:
Okay, resurrecting the old thread :)
> - Running a tool right before the check-in is made permanent (in this case, > check for GuideXML syntax, but in future might be expanded)
Yes, SVN supports hooks.
> - Annotate function
Yup, `svn annotate some/file` (and with a really nice alias `svn blame some/file`). Another benefits: * generating diffs against latest version without contacting the server (SVN creates a pristine copy on a checkout) * possibility to stick arbitrary metadata to files (so the translators could just create a new "property", "en-revision", for example, and use it for keeping track of the version the current translation is based on) * branching, see below Mike Frysinger wrote:
> although moving around in cvs is a pita, i dont see it being all that > common in the xml subdir ... many of the other benefits that svn has > over cvs (branching and changesets) just isnt that useful in terms of > website management imo ...
Well, just have a look at the draft/ subdirectories, especially those related to the handbooks. Just to be clear - I don't propose the conversion now, during the release work, but I certainly see the benefits that are worth the conversion at a less-exposed time. So, what about a gentoo-doc or gentoo-website repo? Looking at the current structure, GDP/website is interested only in gentoo/cvs/gentoo/xml/, and the "work" subdirectory can be nuked (the only doc is an outdated draft from peitolm). Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature