Re: Moving wip to Subversion

[Alistair Crooks <agc%pkgsrc.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:47:30AM +0200, Mike M. Volokhov wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:31:17 -0500, Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
> 
> > I agree.  Every time I have dealt with others wanting to move some
> > project or another to SVN, I ask the same questions...Why?  What does
> > it fix?  What does it gain us?  etc.
> 
> My own pro-SVN/con-CVS list (i.e. why you should use SVN instead of CVS
> for all new projects):
> 
> - transactional commits (mo more "hey folks, please remove my CVS lock!")
> - "single tree" approach, rather "per file" for CVS (for pkgsrc
>   this is not valuable, but mentioned here beacuse of your experience)
> - efficient network operations (diffs, branches, etc.)
> - modular design (libsvn, fsfs/bdb[/sql?] stores, etc.)

What people seem to be talking about here (admittedly some time ago) is
a migration from CVS to Subversion. In the past, Subversion has proved
to be fragile - the bdb backend - and so no-one would advocate using
that, I'm sure.

However, I'd just like to point out that there are other distributed
version control systems out there, and, if we were to move NetBSD
and/or pkgsrc to another version control system, some of them would be
just as good contenders:

+ subversion
+ monotone
+ opencm

and my personal favourite:

+ svk

We should also be looking at the others with a "what do they have that
could be useful?" approach, I believe, and some of the star merging
functionality does look neat, although much more applicable to a
project like the Linux kernel where you have one or two
approvers-on-high, and patchsets are the ideal unit of difference,
rather than the more open approach taken by the BSDs.

Having said that, I don't see any pressing needs to move away from
CVS right now, but I'm definitely keeping an open mind.

> If you are not happy with damn lot of files for big projects, just drop
> the third argument (it's open source, do it yourself or ask on SVN
> development team).
> 
> On the other hand, I really see no reason for pkgsrc-wip SVN migration.
> Because:
> 
> - original pkgsrc is stored in CVS
> - it currently just works
> - no extra tools for most development platforms

Like Mishka, I also think that pkgsrc and pkgsrc-wip should be kept in
sync, although using svk lessens the need for this somewhat.

Enough of the puff, on with the show - keep up the good work, guys.

Alistair


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
pkgsrc-wip-discuss mailing list
pkgsrc-wip-discuss%lists.sourceforge.net@localhost
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-discuss