| 1 |
On Saturday 24 January 2004 16:29, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:43:05PM +0100 or thereabouts, Paul de Vrieze |
| 3 |
wrote: |
| 4 |
> > I think that indeed subversion is superior to CVS, especially on the part |
| 5 |
> > where you want to look at changesets and merging. Maybe we could test |
| 6 |
> > subversion, but we might want to wait until the 1.0 version is released |
| 7 |
> > for actual use (is going to be rather soon now) |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> As Chris mentioned, we were talking about this over dinner yesterday. For |
| 10 |
> now, cvs is what we will be using for the main repository as it has proven |
| 11 |
> to be mostly stable, if lacking in some features that we want/need. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> If we want to look at other solutions (subversion, arch, etc.) that's fine |
| 14 |
> -- I just want to test them on less critical repositories. Then, if/when |
| 15 |
> they have proven to be stable, scalable and in line with what we need, we |
| 16 |
> can think about moving gentoo-x86 over to it. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Let me stress that I did not want to suggest a move to subversion currently. |
| 19 |
It should be very well tested. Last time I tried subversion was not well able |
| 20 |
to handle the required amount of files/bytes. I'm all in favour of testing |
| 21 |
first, and then gradually implementing. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Paul |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 27 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 28 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 29 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives