[Monotone-devel] FYI: why PostgreSQL still uses CVS

[Markus Schiltknecht]

Hi,

every once in a while, some brave soul dares to bring up the VCS debate 
on the PostgreSQL mailing list. And it has happened again [1] and 
surprisingly brought up quite a constructive discussion.

Down the thread, there are some arguments, why they're still using CVS. 
It mainly boils down to:

 - having code in place for CVS (buildfarm)
 - ability to copy the whole repository (cvsup)
 - being used to it (and the workarounds for the major annoyances)

There are other voices, like Gavin Shery [2], who have already tried one 
or more distributed VCS (and I know there are other major contributors, 
too, who are attracted by monotone).

And generally, I feel they could be convinced to move to monotone, as 
soon as they win more than they loose. They surely want to conserve the 
repository history (yes, I'm at it..), they also want to be able to 
checkout quickly (i.e. partial pull and/or significant netsync speedup).

As soon as those two issues are solved, I'll try again to convince them 
and help them migrate. Before that, it's quite hopeless, I fear.

Regards

Markus

[1]: The head of the thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01233.php

[2]: Gavin Shery's post:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01260.php