Andy Colson wrote:
Would a pre-requisite for any new SCM to be anointed as *the* new SCM
that the buildfarm can be reconfigured to run with it? Unless there
is an SCM2CVS option available I suppose... how many SCM's support
such a thing?
I dont think the buildfarm needs to require CVS. The code can be
changed in the buildfarm to just run 'svn up' or 'git up and go'
(sorry, never used git so I had to guess at the command :-) ) right?
Wrong. The buildfarm has quite a lot of CVS-specific intelligence in it
that will need to be adapted to whatever we use to replace CVS. It is
very far from "plug and play". And I sure don't want to keep a CVS repo
just on account of the buildfarm. If and when the "one true postgres
SCM" changes, buildfarm should change along with it. Working out how is
just a part of the problems we'll face.
I have deliberately stayed out of this debate, since I have nothing much
new to say (and I observe that nothing much new has been said ;-) ). But
let me repeat a couple of things I have said previously:
I want to make a change in SCM once only in the foreseeable future. And
I'm in no great hurry. If I have a preference it is ever so slightly for
Mercurial, but that's just based on impression rather than solid
experience. I have used Subversion for quite some time - it has sorted
out some of the more obvious wrinkles that CVS presents, but I'm not
sure it's that much of a quantum leap that it's worht the trouble. I'll
be interested to see what Mark Miekle says after looking at all the systems.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
