Matthew T. O'Connor said:
> Believe me, I understand that CVS is a pain, that is why there are so 
> many replacements being developed.  However, if you want people to keep 
> downloading updates, testing and giving feedback, you shouldn't pull the 
> rug out from under their feet by changing the tools they use without any 
> warning during such a critical time.

My experience is now 2 for 2 in Subversion conversions that most people to
freak out and hyperventilate before realizing that everything is just
fine! I'm also a primary developer with TWIG, and a few months ago I
installed Subversion onto the project server and put in all of the work I
had been doing towards a next generation TWIG (what may become TWIG 3) and
then announced to the developers' board mailing list that I was going to
upload my own new work to Subversion and that I would not be actively
developing TWIG 2.x anymore. 

And so began the insanity... somewhere in between me working on TWIG 3 and
not on TWIG 2, it was understood that *everything* had to be moved into
SVN, thus causing much gnashing of teeth and unhappiness. It took two
weeks and lots of heated emails before everyone calmed down and agreed
that TWIG 2 would remain forever in CVS while TWIG 3 would begin its life
in SVN.

Paul has one very good approach with the sunrise and sunset periods, but I
think it might actually be easier to just leave DBMail 2.0 behind in CVS
and begin work on 2.1 in SVN. All maintenance would be done in CVS, all
new work in SVN, and once we start getting close to 2.2, the better
branching of SVN kicks in. Just sharing an idea for an alternative plan --
I don't have a strong preference either way just as long as we're all
agreed to something workable.

Aaron

Reply via email to