On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 11:08 +0100, Adam Tkac wrote: > 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? We don't use it as a true version conrtol system anyways. > 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 :) ) And other VC systems have no problems, right? > - you have to keep huge changes on your machine when you're doing > bigger patch. And it is really confusing sometimes Careful branching and tagging enables you to be able to commit often while avoiding a big mess. > - 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 The abovve + CVS update. And what's wrong with ssh, diff, scp and patch? If you're doing one thing over and over -- ever heard of scripts? > - 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 Branches. > - CVS server outage :) Other services never have outages? -- Lubomir Kundrak (Red Hat Security Response Team) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
