Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>
>> If we want to minimize the pain of changing and keep the same mode of
>> operation Subversion is definitely the right choice. Its goal was to provide
>> the same operational model as CVS and fix the implementation and architectural
>> problems.
>>
>
> Erm ... but this is not an argument in favor of changing.
>
> AFAIR the only real disadvantage of CVS that we've run up against is
> that it's hard to shuffle files around to different directories without
> losing their change history (or more accurately, making the history
> harder to find). Now that is a pretty considerable annoyance on some
> days, but it's not sufficient reason to change to something else.
> I have no doubt that every other SCMS has annoyances of its own.
>
>
Oh, goody! My favourite non-productive debate! :-)
I work daily with SVN, and it certainly has some of the CVS pain points
fixed, plus one or two nice gadgets. It's annoyed me a couple of times
too, although I can't remember exactly how.
Let me throw another couple of data points into the mix.
1. The buildfarm is very heavily dependent on CVS, and any change to
anything else will be quite painful. There is no guarantee that all the
members even have SVN installed, let alone anything else. And someone
would have to code and test significant client changes. That said, a lot
of the tortuous logic could be removed - change detection would almost
just resolve to comparing two tree numbers with SVN, for example.
2. Many people (and some buildfarm members) operate against mirrors of
the main repo which are created with rsync or CVSup. I am not aware of
any way to do the equivalent with SVN - any info would be gratefully
received. Of course, SVN is better at disconnected operation than CVS,
so it might be a non-issue for many. Even so, it might be a pity to have
to forego the facility.
I have no doubt we'll change someday to something better. I don't know
what it is and I don't think we need to be in any hurry. This space is
still very fluid.
cheers
andrew