Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration

[Helge Hess]

On Oct 12, 2005, at 3:10, MJ Ray wrote:
> That was not the claim. SVN is under a GPL-incompatible licence.
> In practical terms, this makes any GPL application linking with
> it undistributable, IIRC.

I agree, but how does that make the situation _worse_ than with CVS?

> So, forget having a slick GPL'd GNUstep
> app to manage your archive.

So it would need to be LGPLed or does this conflict as well?

In general I agree and also see this as an issue, but then the API is 
still a pro argument because its still the only system which has one at 
all! So you don't loose anything but you gain the ability to directly 
interface, even if the result must be "just" LGPL.

> It's more software for people to use, and apparently big software
> at that. According to http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/INSTALL
> the prerequisites for compiling include the Apache Web Server.

For rather obvious reasons its not requited to compile Apache httpd2 on 
client systems. And it isn't even required on servers unless you 
actually want to use Apache httpd2 instead of SSH.

> Selecting the client package on a debian testing machine invites
> nearly 5Mb to install, compared with just over 1Mb for CVS.

If this a major issue, I hearby offer to sponsor all GNUstep developers 
the required 5MB of additional disk space.
Given that a 250GB disk is roughly EUR 99,-, I'm happy to sent you your 
0.2 Euro Cent (lets be generous and make this 1 full Euro Cent!) any 
time you want.

> If the trees head off into the subversion mists, can there
> be patches and daily-snapshots for the rest of the world, please?

Well, thats one of the major features in Subversion, you can actually 
produce daily snapshot in a consistent, secure and automated manner.

> Oh well, at least no-one suggested BitKeeper. ;-)

Ok, I will honor the smiley ;-)

Greets,
  Helge
--
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
OpenGroupware.org