"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against
> creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support
> requirements when other solutions exist.
Who said anything about internal infrastructure? We'd be helping
another open source project flesh out and test a possibly-incomplete
area of their code, not undertaking a fork. (Now, if they rejected
patches on the grounds that they don't care about CVS, then this
doesn't work, but I can't imagine they would; they do have partial
support for it.)
Now, switching to some other SCM might indeed create some new support
requirements. I was a bit surprised to read this on another mailing
list yesterday:
>> From a relative time to install from source standpoint it looks like
>> this:
>>
>> CVS - 10 minutes (no external dependencies)
>> GIT - 8 minutes (no external dependencies)
>> Mercurial - 1 minute (depends on Python)
>> Subversion - 4-6 hours (depends on a multitude of packages and will
>> only work with specific versions which you
>> learn about the hard way at build time).
For those on platforms where SVN comes prepackaged, this might not be
a big problem (except maybe for pulling in packages they don't want).
For other developers this kind of thing could be a showstopper.
regards, tom lane
