From kde-core-devel  Sat Oct 09 00:11:09 2004
From: Brad Hards <bradh () frogmouth ! net>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:11:09 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: Moving to SubVersion
Message-Id: <200410091011.15842.bradh () frogmouth ! net>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=109728069005533
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--nextPart1369810.RTfqCk9GYG"

--nextPart1369810.RTfqCk9GYG
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:40 am, Richard Smith wrote:
> No, but I don't expect to find *any* objective comparisons anywhere.
> Everyone has an agenda, and hopefully we're all grown up enough to notice
> when what we're reading has a lot of spin on it. But that page does conta=
in
> quite a lot of factual content, which I think is worth reading.
I'm sure not even Martin Pool (distcc, rsync, other great projects) would=20
claim that is is unbiased, but you might like to read some of his blogging =
on=20
VC.
http://sourcefrog.net/weblog/software/vc?flav=3Dindex
> > anyway I think most of us (at least those who spoke tonight) prefer
> > subversion because it is cvs-like in the spirit.
>
> So is CVS. And we already have that. I don't think being similar to the
> system we're trying to replace should be a selection criterion.
=46amiliarity with the command syntax / workflow should be though. We have =
a lot=20
of people who don't know much version control (perhaps just cvs checkout, c=
vs=20
up, cvs diff, cvs commit) - especially in doco and translation teams. It=20
would be handy if the same basic commands "just worked".

> All I'm saying is that we should try out more than one option before
> switching. If we find problems in SVN, they're likely to not be significa=
nt
> enough to make us change again, so we'll have to put up with them.
> Therefore it's better to find and avoid them now.
I have three issues:
1. What specific problems with our current version control system are we=20
trying to solve?
2. Who is going to do the evaluation work to tell which of the options best=
=20
solves those problems?
3. Who is going to do the migration task, including providing support and=20
documentation for everyone involved in KDE development?

Brad

--nextPart1369810.RTfqCk9GYG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBBZyyjGwwszQ/PZzgRAi7rAJ9/5W7YbV5+UhlSxbpSD00+XGwwjwCgoERI
mVvl8PwIW9M6sPHT9LyIDTo=
=Hk/l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1369810.RTfqCk9GYG--