[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration
From: |
MJ Ray |
Subject: |
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration |
Date: |
12 Oct 2005 03:10:04 GMT |
Andrew Ruder <aeruder@ksu.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 01:32:57AM +0200, Helge Hess wrote: [...]
> > b) Svn is not a viable option for GNU projects due to licensing
> > issues (is this really true?)
>
> There is obviously no issue or gcc wouldn't be moving to it next week.
That was not the claim. SVN is under a GPL-incompatible licence.
In practical terms, this makes any GPL application linking with
it undistributable, IIRC. So, forget having a slick GPL'd GNUstep
app to manage your archive.
[...]
> I can't agree with you more here. With the exception of finding a
> server, moving from CVS => Subversion brings many benefits for not a lot
> of effort. The learning curve is non-existant. Assuming we find a
> place that everyone agrees with for hosting, I can only ask one
> question:
>
> Why not?
It's more software for people to use, and apparently big software
at that. According to http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/INSTALL
the prerequisites for compiling include the Apache Web Server.
Selecting the client package on a debian testing machine invites
nearly 5Mb to install, compared with just over 1Mb for CVS.
That's quite an overhead for something which seems very likely
not to be the long-term winner, because it doesn't solve the
client-server problem at all.
If the trees head off into the subversion mists, can there
be patches and daily-snapshots for the rest of the world, please?
What's the tearing hurry to rush down a dead end? At the
speed at which git-based tools seem to be converging - arch
was heading git-wards before the latest twist in the road,
darcs has --enable-git, monotone is doing something with git
that I don't yet understand, nor do I fathom Mercurial - it
might be all over bar the porting in a few months.
Oh well, at least no-one suggested BitKeeper. ;-)
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, (continued)
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Andrew Ruder, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Wim Oudshoorn, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Andrew Ruder, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Wim Oudshoorn, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Andrew Ruder, 2005/10/11
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Alex Perez, 2005/10/11
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration,
MJ Ray <=
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Jeremy Tregunna, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Alex Perez, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Markus Hitter, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Nicolas Roard, 2005/10/12
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Jeremy Tregunna, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/12
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Markus Hitter, 2005/10/12
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Rogelio M. Serrano Jr., 2005/10/13