On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 01:18:02AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> writes:
>
> > Maybe a better SCM could help with this, but I doubt it.
>
> I haven't seen any particular reason why we should adopt another SCM.
> Perhaps BitKeeper or SubVersion would be better for our purposes than
> CVS, but are they enough better to justify the switchover costs?
> I doubt it.
CVS has it problems, and there are other SCM packages available that
address those, but the but the main problem for postgresql is shortage
of uber-hackers, as Tom says. Once that problems solved (more good
coders seasoned in the codebase) then it might be time to switch.
By then, they'll be even easier to use. ;-)
Ross
--
Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D. reedstrm@rice.edu
Research Scientist phone: 713-348-6166
The Connexions Project http://cnx.rice.edu fax: 713-348-3665
Rice University MS-375, Houston, TX 77005
GPG Key fingerprint = F023 82C8 9B0E 2CC6 0D8E F888 D3AE 810E 88F0 BEDE
