discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration


From: Christopher Armstrong
Subject: Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:36:43 +1000

GNUstep is a fairly mature project (in terms of rapid code changes, esp.
interfaces), with relatively small needs in terms of expansion i.e. most
of the additions involved are adding one or two new classes every so
often, and filling out some functionality where it is missing.

Maybe SVN would be useful to GNUstep hosting applications and
libraries/frameworks in much earlier stages of their development. I also
noticed that there would be a need to change hosting: this could be a
painful transition if not handled properly (I don't want to be a
doomsayer, but it's a potential problem). 

I also don't think the project needs to feel pressured into changing
revision systems. Wine, a *very* large project accepting large volumes
of patches, still uses CVS (I believe), where all patches have to go
through one project maintainer. Also this system has it's limitations
(many patches are never posted), it still seems to be functioning
correctly for wine.

IMHO I think the main issue is keeping a clean code base. With careful
patch review and testing, this should be possible, and requires skill
outside of the use of SVN/CVS (though they may be able to help
significantly).

I hope I'm not being too negative; these are just a few arguments on the
other side of the coin.

Cheers
Chris


On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 17:50 +0200, Roland Schwingel wrote:
> Hi...
> 
> I was loosly following this thread for a while but now I will throw in 
> my $0.02 on this...
> 
> MJ Ray wrote:
>  > The drawbacks of SVN remain:
>  > * non-distributed (same as CVS)
> Is this really needed?
> 
>  > * incompatible with the git-using tools (same as CVS)
> Is this a drawback? There are a lot of good tools
> for svn. Look at the svn homepage!  I tested git 2 month
> ago at home and found subversion to be much more useable.
> 
>  > * poor library licence limits integration
> You don't need to program against it. You need to use it
> as repository for GNUStep's sourcecode (checkin/checkout etc).
> For me this is is not a drawback like the previous issue you
> were throwing in.
> 
>  > * client at least fivefold more disk, probably bigger in memory too
> ??? A subversion working copy is bigger then the CVS one, thats true.
> But not more than twice! How do you come to that number?
> 
>  > * not supported at savannah
> I heared a rumor a while ago (svn mailing list) they are evaluating it...
> But maybe I am wrong with this statement.
> 
>  > * reconfigure everything now, only to move again soon
> I don't think you need to move again after going to svn.
> 
> We used CVS for a very long time, but then switched over to SVN 2 years ago,
> and we *never* regretted it. We are having several hundred commits a 
> month and
> SVN is absolutely reliable and fast and it has some major benefits over 
> CVS, maybe
> other have mentioned this already:
> - atomic commits
> - deleteable folders
> - copy/move files with history(!) without manually hacking the repos
> - no more mess with binary files
> - customizeable with hooks.
> - excellent web frontend thru ViewCVS for diffing changes or browsing 
> the repos.
> - a lot other excellent clients and tools.
> - fast learning and switching from CVS.
> - excellent documentation (free SVN book)
> - ...
> 
> And finally we experienced a noticable productivity gain after the switch
> 
> So I think when switching to SVN gnustep would gain also.
> 
> Just my $0.02.
> 
> Roland
> 
> 

-- 
Christopher Armstrong <quineska@gamebox.net>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]