> Warren,
>
> what part of "We'd like to watch the SCM space for a while before making
> any decisions" don't you understand?
Andrew hold on,
He didn't say *which* dev cycle. He is just enthusiastic and the reality
is this project is about 2 years overdue to run screaming from the
burning building that is CVS.
Does that mean we should change? Only if the people doing development
feel a need to change. However, there is a distinct feeling of *OMG
CHANGE RUN RUN* whenever it comes to anything infrastructure (and
frankly some parts of code) in this project.
It is certainly valid that, if it ain't broke don't fix it. CVS is not
broke for us, it is however barely maintained. That in itself is enough
to consider moving off.
The fact that SVN *is* a CVS replacement and does not change most of the
workflow of existing developers is an additional strong argument to use it.
All that being said, I welcome Warren's enthusiasm, a lot of the hackers
in this group could use a strong dose of positive thinking about change
around here.
Lastly, who really cares? Does it really matter? No. I would much rather
Warren (if he has the skills) put some effort into Patch Review.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/