Philip Chee wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:03:15 +0200, Axel Hecht wrote:
It might be worth noting that Mozilla does not intend to migrate to svn,
as far as I pick up the noise. If we'd drop CVS, it would be for
something that offers more than svn, it seems.
Not that the mozilla cvs repository is anywhere close to being
migratable, so that question is pretty theoretic.
I hear somebody tried to import the complete mozilla.org cvs into GIT.
The process ran for several days before crashing because it ran out of
memory.
Actually, there are even quite a few sins in our RCS files that break
importers, so I recall that process to be "running a few hours 'til it
breaks" and the rinse repeat that a few times until it came to "run a
few days before it OOMs" :-(
Regarding svn in particular, it didn't fix a single problem I had, and
it was more of a nightmare to explain to newbies, though those were
computer-illiterate math scientists. I found it a pain in the ass to
admin, too.
Not being able to get revisions on other branches from a branch is a
blocker to me, svn doesn't support what mozilla does with cvs graph in
bonsai.
I'm not fond of the "oh, let's just double the size of your working
copy" either, though that's likely more an issue with the mozilla rep
than with mozdev projects.
Regarding other systems, I don't care enough. To me, a well designed and
administratable permissions system on the server always was key to
deploy such a thing. Apart from that, CVS works for me, mozilla will
keep using it for, likely, ever, and I just cut down on things that I
need to know in parallel. Just like I drop all wiki-knowledge besides
mediawiki, not because other systems suck, but just because they're not
worth the effort of maintaining and switching separate skill sets.
Axel
_______________________________________________
Project_owners mailing list
[email protected]
http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
