[gentoo-dev] Re: CVS alternatives -- meta-cvs

[Jörg Schaible]

Grant Goodyear wrote:
> While looking into arch I discovered meta-cvs
> (http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/mcvs.html), which is also not entirely
> ready for prime time (in terms of migrating portage), but it might be
> closer, and it might be _really_ nice for gentoo subprojects.  Thanks to
> the work of mkennedy, we now have an mcvs ebuild, and I just added an
> mcvs patch to the latest ~x86 version of viewcvs.

What I do not like at all on such a solution is, that it is just another
compatibility layer on a system that is already full of compatibility
trade-offs. This was in fact the main reason for the subversion people to
start over with a new version control.

CVS lacks for a good branch support (ever tried to merge a branch twice ?),
a good role concept, renaming operations and atomicity (i.e. a commit with
multiple files spread over a directory tree is not guaranteed to work
atomar). Subversion addresses all this issues (at least they will someday
for the improved branching).

But if you have the impression, that it is not ready yet (although they are
self-hosting for years), you could also take a look at Perforce
(www.perforce.com). It is already in portage. Although it is commercial and
closed source, it is free for OSS development and really mature even for
big repos and available on all plattforms Gentoo is running. We used it in
my last company for years. They have a really fast responding support and
will answer any of your questions. They might be really interested to have
an installation for Gentoo gaining also reputation. You may also contact
the parrot developers and ask for their experiences. IMHO they are using
Perforce for the new Perl development too.

Regards,
Jörg




--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list