Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:26:50 +0700
Subject: Re: SVN? (was: geronimo-dev Digest 12 Aug 2003 21:59:40 -0000 Issue
 39)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
From: Jason Dillon <jason@coredevelopers.net>
To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <AF7E8E82-CE25-11D7-B36D-000A959D0312@yahoo.co.uk>
Message-Id: <AB834EE6-CE28-11D7-ACF2-000A9566A360@coredevelopers.net>

If subversion will work reliably, especially on my mac (with out me 
having to hack my fink dist too much), and provides the required 
functionality with little or no pain, then I think we should go for it. 
  I am worried about how production ready it is.  I do not want to spend 
time debugging subversion... at all.

When I started setting her up for CDN that is what I was doing once I 
got all the bits in place... debugging it to find out why it was not 
working as advertised.  But, if we have a secure install that is 
functional (and someone else who knows better than me, is maintaining 
it) then we have nothing to loose and much to gain.

Lets get some more details and play with it, then we can evaluate and 
make a decision.  I am not willing to blindly jump, as I am sure not 
many of you are either... but CVS has pissed me off too many times in 
the past, so I am ready to toss it to the rubbish bin if subversion is 
ready to take its place.

--jason


On Thursday, August 14, 2003, at 02:05  PM, James Strachan wrote:

>
> On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 11:00  pm, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>> Jeremy Boynes asked:
>>> Greg Stein wrote:
>>>> "sorry. no more CVS. it is a bitch to maintain. switch to SVN."
>>
>>> Should be be planning for this, and perhaps move now whilst we are 
>>> small?
>>
>> Another thing to consider, but again Greg is the expert, is that this 
>> is a
>> huge umbrella with a lot of sub-projects.  Right now there is one 
>> module.
>> Moving between modules in CVS isn't a whole lot of fun, even if 
>> doable.  SVN
>> has a different model, which would make partitioning acces rights, and
>> moving things around a WHOLE LOT easier.
>
> That sounds useful, then we can have committers in each area of the 
> server rather than one massive committer pool.
>
>> This project seems almost ideal to give Subversion a whirl, 
>> considering how
>> the project structure interacts with key differences between CVS and
>> Subversion.
>
> Agreed. I think I'm now +0.5 for SVN now (though once I've tried the 
> eclipse plugin I'll be more happy :).
>
> (This just means we'd best get the cvslog report for Maven updated to 
> handle SVN too :)
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>