Hi,
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> CVSup is not required, and is absent from most existing clients. I don't
> use it any more since the Fedora project stopped supporting it.
..which is quite understandable, concerning the PITA compiling modula-3
gives you (or at least has given me, it still hurts).
> The point you are missing is that, while we know existing buildfarm
> members all have CVS installed, we don't know that they have SVN or
> whatever, and requiring them to install it will involve significant
> distributed pain.
Okay, I certainly agree that CVS is much more wide spread and available
than most (if not all) other VCSes. Let's change that ;-)
> It will also involve some considerable localised pain
> (probably on my part) in rewriting the client. Right now I'm thinking it
> might make some sense to future-proof buildfarm by creating some sort of
> snapshot server. OTOH, if we avoid use of whatever SCM system that the
> project uses, we aren't testing that part of the process.
Did I mention that monotone is a very good snapshot server? *duck*
You probably don't want to reinvent the weel, as 'snapshot serving' is
exactly what a VCS should do (among other things).
> You're making Tom's point again :-)
Yeah, sorry, couldn't resist :-)
> IIRC you don't need to be connected to the repo to run "svn diff",
> whereas you do to run "cvs diff".
Yes, in the simplest case of comparing against the immediate successor
revision. But certainly not for: svn diff -r${FURTHER_IN_THE_PAST}, as
subversion does not have that data available (nor does CVS, for that
matter).
> We know the warts. If this were a green fields project there is no doubt
> we would not use CVS. But many proponents of other systems ignore the
> downside of changing.
Well, I guess many advocates for other VCSes (like myself) simply don't
particularly like to talk about the downsides... But they are probably
more aware of them than most other people.
> One thing I want to know is that whatever we change to will still be
> there, maintained and in widespread use, many years down the track. So
> far I am not sure about that for any possible replacement, with the
> possible exception of SVN.
That's certainly a valid concern, too. Probably *the* one where monotone
is weaker compared to git and mercurial. :-( We are working on that
issue, though.
Regards
Markus
