From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14474 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2003 19:42:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14467 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2003 19:42:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO molenda.com) (192.220.74.81) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2003 19:42:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 62140 invoked by uid 19025); 19 Dec 2003 19:42:52 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:42:00 -0000 From: Jason Molenda To: Per Bothner Cc: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: switch to subversion? Message-ID: <20031219114252.A60180@molenda.com> References: <3FE35399.9090202@bothner.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <3FE35399.9090202@bothner.com>; from per@bothner.com on Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 11:38:01AM -0800 X-SW-Source: 2003-q4/txt/msg00270.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 11:38:01AM -0800, Per Bothner wrote: > I don't know much about the internals and security implications > of either, and I'm certainly not volunteering for anything, but > curious what people think about the idea. I think anyone you talk to will be greatly interested in general (it'd be like asking "Who here likes kittens") but IMHO it's more trouble than you'd want for a big project at this point. I don't know if any of the system maintainers really has the time to learn enough about svn and keep up to date on it to support an installation, and there will certainly be a need for support when it is first brought up. Any group switching to svn will have a big cost of all the developers trying to re-learn their revision control system - even though I know the svn folks are trying to keep it similar to a cvs style RCS. J