I like the idea of Sourceforge, insofar as it has much more than just CVS: a ready-made structure for documentation, FAQs, web page, collaborative development, etc.
If the developers were really set on subversion, the Sourceforge CVS could be used just to distribute stable and devel releases, and all the dirty work of actual development and testing could take place behind the scenes, using subversion set up somewhere else. Scott Prater Dpto. Sistemas [EMAIL PROTECTED] SERVICOM 2000 Av. Primado Reig, 189 entlo. 46020 Valencia - Spain Tel. (+34) 96 332 12 00 Fax. (+34) 96 332 12 01 www.servicom2000.com > -----Mensaje original----- > De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > nombre de Jim Trocki > Enviado el: lunes, 07 de junio de 2004 22:33 > Para: David Nolan > CC: mon mailing list > Asunto: Re: david nolan's patches > > > On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, David Nolan wrote: > > > (In fact, I may have posted it to the list, but I can't recall > > right now. Time for some > email archeology.) > > ahh, i apologize for my confusion. clearly my recollection was faulty, > and you now corrected it. thanks. > > as far as maintaining the code in cvs with the intention of allowing > better cooperation amongst ourselves, i think it's a good idea. i don't > know if the sourceforge thing is what would be best. it does have some > advantages, such as the bug tracking functionality, mon is already > a registered project there and all (i haven't looked at that thing in > forever), but cvs tends to aggravate me. i guess i've been living with it > long enough to just accept it if that's all that sourceforge offers. i'd > prefer giving subversion a try. > > thoughts? > > _______________________________________________ > mon mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon > _______________________________________________ mon mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
