Re: Switching from CVS to GIT

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Paul Smith <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:57:20 -0400
> 
> On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 21:10 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Can you tell why?
> 
> The main reasons are lack of functionality in CVS re renaming, removing,
> and reorganizing files.  However, it's not a critical issue; I've lived
> with it for this long.  The other problems CVS has (poor branch/merge,
> no atomicity, server-only repositories, etc.) are not as big a problem
> for a project the size of GNU make.

Then perhaps you don't need to switch at all.  Doing so will require a
non-trivial effort; I don't know how your free time, but mine is
hardly enough to try debugging an occasional w32-related bug report.
Is it really worth wasting what few resources we have on switching to
another VCS?

> Another reason others have mentioned is making it simple for
> "downstream" folks to work on make.  Ideally I'd be happy to hand over
> maintenance of the non-POSIX ports (for example) to others more
> completely, and just pull from their changed trees.

Why not give those who do work on non-POSIX ports write access to the
CVS tree?

> It looks like (as someone else mentioned) SVN may be supported on
> Savannah "soonish".  So another option is to wait for that.  I certainly
> don't want to switch more than once, if I do decide to switch.

SVN certainly sounds as easier for use on Windows than GIT.