> The active committer community objected to the transfer of
> dead code from cvs to svn, arguing that the Avalon svn
> should contain the active alive code.
And that would have been wrong. SVN is our successor to CVS, and we are to
PRESERVE *ALL* history of our code, which is an asset.
> In my mind (and I'm not alone) this was the start of a fallout
> between the chair, certain members of the board, and members of
> the Avalon development community.
I'm not on the Board, and I am one of the most vocal at insisting on
absolute preservation of development history.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
