Re: Seeking initial reactions: Moving setup from CVS to Subversion?

["Max Bowsher" <maxb at ukf dot net>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Can we put this discussion to rest?

I believe it is naturally winding down as it becomes clear that subversion 
on sourceware isn't really feasible at this time.

A few closing comments:

> - I would not support giving you access to the sourceware web server
> and allowing you to maintain a local version of subversion just for
> setup.exe use.  I do not believe it is an appropriate use of the
> limited resources on sourceware.org.

I assume you are talking about memory/CPU time? I wasn't aware sourceware 
was running close to capacity. That does put a different spin on the 
situation - it clearly isn't appropriate to be experimenting with new 
services if sustaining the current ones is an issue.

> - I don't want to set up another system for inspecting the sources on
> the web.

ViewCVS can do both, you know.

> - I do not want to set up subversion on sourceware until there is a
> consensus that it is the way the whole system will be moving.  Possibly
> you could get consensus in overseers for this, and you are welcome to
> try, but I don't think this is going to happen any time soon.

No, it's not. Subversion is going to have to grow support for CVS modules in 
the way that they are used in the src repository before that can happen, 
which, even optimistically, probably means subversion 1.3 at the earliest.

> I appreciate very much that you are willing to step in and offer
> assistance for maintaining setup.exe but if the only way you will do
> this is to move the sources to subversion then "Thanks, but no thanks."

Subversion is not a pre-condition for my work on setup - just something that 
would be extremely useful. I'm sure you can understand why contemplating 
moving lots of source files into subdirectories, whilst using cvs, does 
*not* fill me with joy. I guess it's time for me to look into the 
scripted-munging-of-RCS-files solution.

Max.