Re: Switching from CVS to GIT

[Benoit SIGOURE]

On Oct 14, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > 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?

OTOH, Git has a git-cvsserver, which means that you can still access  
the Git repository with a standard CVS client.  Most of the time,  
people chose to restrain the CVS access to read-only, but you can go  
read/write if you want (although I've heard of a couple of issues  
with write access, not sure whether this was only branch-related  
problems or real commit problems).

--
Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna
EPITA Research and Development Laboratory

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part