On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 23:33 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote: > More likely, people are "happy enough" with CVS (warts and all) to not > want to invest the time and effort on alternatives. That's certainly the case. CVS isn't wonderful but it does the job well enough -- and it's certainly better using CVS than trying to learn something new. I could perhaps manage a switch to git -- but even that I'm not convinced of the need for. And anything else would certainly be a retrograde step, I think. After all I'm bad enough at typing 'cvs diff' in git repositories already -- I don't want to add another gratuitous new version control system into the mix. > I really feel pretty strongly that if we're going to switch, there needs > to be bigger investigation into what work people are trying to do, how > they accomplish it and how we can make things _better_ rather than just > switching SCMs for nominal amounts of tool improvement. I agree strongly with the above. If a switch is proposed, I'd like to see a very clear list of the improvements it promises. -- dwmw2 _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
