On Jan 30, 2008 3:34 AM, Stefan Seyfried <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 08:50:10PM -0600, Victor Lowther wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2008 4:27 PM, Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 13:07 -0600, Victor Lowther wrote: > > > > Anyone else think that moving away from CVS for source control is a > > > > good idea? I am partial to Mercurial, but any of the modern > > > > distributed source control systems would be lightyears better than > > > > CVS. > > > > > > Moving to git is pretty easy, as fd.o hosts lots of git projects. > > > Mercurial is harder as is not standard for fd.o. > > > > What would it take to make that happen? > > More important: what is it good for? pm-utils is a project with only > a few files (until autocrappification came, which increased the number > significantly, but still _very_ small). Moving to git or something else > buys us not really anything, but it costs resources. And no, CVS was > never the bottleneck in pm-utils development.
It buys us that Victor can go off and do a whole patch series to POSIXify the whole system. And it got committed in small, logical chunks. That would be a PITA (if even possible) on CVS. -- Dan _______________________________________________ Pm-utils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
