On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 11:41:58AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, 7 Nov 2007 15:12:45 +0100 > Adam Tkac <atkac@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > CVS has already passed over best years. I'm wonder why modern > > project like Fedora still has sources in this ancient system. Are here > > any plans to replace it by git, mercurial, svn or other more modern > > version control system? > > Replacing a VCS for the fun of it is pretty pointless. Can you > elaborate on a workflow you would like to see that CVS is not suited > to? Right now, CVS works fine for what we do, which is mostly editing > spec files. > > I am by no means a proponent of CVS. I think it sucks. But we have no > _usecase_ for a different VCS at the moment. > > josh It's not replacement for fun. Yes, CVS works and I believe it will work to end of universe. But question is if We have something better than CVS. And We have. There're some common problems (yes, CVS and SVN suffer :) ) - you have to keep huge changes on your machine when you're doing bigger patch. And it is really confusing sometimes - you can't easily move source tree under development. When I want to do development on more machines I have to do ssh, diff, scp, patch. It's pretty annoying - when you're doing on some feature you can't do on it simulateously with maintenance & bugfixing. You have to diff, save diff, fix bug, commit, dig your uncomplete "feature" patch, patch source and continue on development - CVS server outage :) all this common problems are solvable with CVS. But I know really better workflows which cannot be used with CVS. Also I don't believe that it's hard to switch from one VCS to other if We have arguments. Yes, it will need some work like all improvements. Adam > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- Adam Tkac, Red Hat, Inc. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
