On 20 Oct 2005 08:58:36 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Re: moving to subversion > | > | On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 12:19:52PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > | > We've discussed this extensively at CodeSourcery, and I think everyone > | > is uniformly in favor. The superior branch facilities are a key > | > benefit. You got us through the Bugzilla transition, and that's working > | > well. Make it happen. > | > | It seems that there is consensus, but let's be sure. Certainly as the guy > | who has to produce the releases, Mark's voice should weigh most heavily. > | > | Are there any maintainers (folks in MAINTAINERS) who have objections or > | concerns? > > I've been travelling for the last couple or so weeks and did not have > the chance to test the svn repo. I'm following the discussion to get > an idea of the transition issues and I must say I do have concerns. > If to make this work, we have to require the latest system tools X, Y > and Z, then we're placing too high a barrier. Not everybody does its > development on its own laptop it can reformat or fiddle with. I'm > looking forward to solutions that lower the entry barrier, > specifically with repect too OpenSSH, diff and svk.
If it is at all possible we should probably try to keep read-only CVS working (and up-to-date) for HEAD and release-branches. This will allow occasional contributors and technically-less-provided people to continue working in submit-patch mode or in regular testing without raising the barrier for them. I guess it should be possible with some commit-trigger scripts which svn surely has? Just another 2 cents, Richard.
