Subversion?

[Dan Sully]

Dean - what do you think about switching to SubVersion? Although not my
favorite VCS, it has advantages over CVS, primarily with the concept of
"change sets". In trying to track down everything that happened when Robert
commited the TT stuff, one could just look at the change number, which spans
across files. I believe there are cvs-to-svn converters as well.

Something to think about for the future.

-D
--
<gldnmean> Being around marketing could be interesting, if they're released
into a death trap filled labyrinth while you hunt them for sport

[dean]

Yeah, I'd really like to move away from CVS, but it's entrenched. I
used to use Perforce when I worked for WebTV/Microsoft and it was
incredibly great. Alas, it's expensive...

On Apr 28, 2004, at 3:58 PM, Dan Sully wrote:

> Dean - what do you think about switching to SubVersion? Although not my
> favorite VCS, it has advantages over CVS, primarily with the concept of
> "change sets". In trying to track down everything that happened when
> Robert
> commited the TT stuff, one could just look at the change number, which
> spans
> across files. I believe there are cvs-to-svn converters as well.
>
> Something to think about for the future.
>
> -D
> --
> <gldnmean> Being around marketing could be interesting, if they're
> released
> into a death trap filled labyrinth while you hunt them for sport
>

[Dan Sully]

* dean blackketter <dean (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com> shaped the electrons to say...

>Yeah, I'd really like to move away from CVS, but it's entrenched. I
>used to use Perforce when I worked for WebTV/Microsoft and it was
>incredibly great. Alas, it's expensive...

I use perforce for $REALJOB, I love it. The perl project itself also uses it.
Free for OSS projects, but you need to send in documentation to them.

More people are moving to SVN - DBI & DBD::Oracle are on svn.perl.org, and
the DateTime project will be soon.

-D
--
<moof> I like random-access pants.

[Brooks Davis]

Actually, it's free (as in beer) for projects with OSI licenses. You
have to execute a license agreement and renew yearly, but there's not
cost beyond that.

-- Brooks

On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:25:57PM -0700, dean blackketter wrote:
> Yeah, I'd really like to move away from CVS, but it's entrenched. I
> used to use Perforce when I worked for WebTV/Microsoft and it was
> incredibly great. Alas, it's expensive...
>
> On Apr 28, 2004, at 3:58 PM, Dan Sully wrote:
>
> >Dean - what do you think about switching to SubVersion? Although not my
> >favorite VCS, it has advantages over CVS, primarily with the concept of
> >"change sets". In trying to track down everything that happened when
> >Robert
> >commited the TT stuff, one could just look at the change number, which
> >spans
> >across files. I believe there are cvs-to-svn converters as well.
> >
> >Something to think about for the future.
> >
> >-D
> >--
> ><gldnmean> Being around marketing could be interesting, if they're
> >released
> >into a death trap filled labyrinth while you hunt them for sport
> >

[Lars Kellogg-Stedman]

In article
<008601c42fd7$8dd16140$020110ac (AT) majestic (DOT) internal.office.cursor.biz>,
"Kevin Walsh" <kevin (AT) cursor (DOT) biz> wrote:

> My vote would be to stick with the free (for all) CVS system.

In point of fact, subversion is also free for all, GPL'd, etc. I like
having a versioned directory structure, and I like being able to track
revisions across file renames. Document properties (aka extended
attributes) are also quite nifty.

On the other hand, I've twice lost my subversion repository because
something fouled up the BerkeleyDB files that hold the revision
information.

So I would also recommend sticking with CVS, but primarily for reasons
of reliability. If something goes awry in CVS, you're more likely to
lose a single file rather than your whole repository, and the fact that
the RCS tools can be used on individual files means that there are more
options for recovering from odd situations.

-- Lars

[dean]

I spoke to a senior guy (I forget who) from Perforce at a trade show
some time ago. He seemed pretty uncomfortable about licensing to a
for-profit company for an OSI project. Maybe times have changed
there...

On May 1, 2004, at 4:39 PM, Brooks Davis wrote:

> Actually, it's free (as in beer) for projects with OSI licenses. You
> have to execute a license agreement and renew yearly, but there's not
> cost beyond that.
>
> -- Brooks
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:25:57PM -0700, dean blackketter wrote:
>> Yeah, I'd really like to move away from CVS, but it's entrenched. I
>> used to use Perforce when I worked for WebTV/Microsoft and it was
>> incredibly great. Alas, it's expensive...
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2004, at 3:58 PM, Dan Sully wrote:
>>
>>> Dean - what do you think about switching to SubVersion? Although not
>>> my
>>> favorite VCS, it has advantages over CVS, primarily with the concept
>>> of
>>> "change sets". In trying to track down everything that happened when
>>> Robert
>>> commited the TT stuff, one could just look at the change number,
>>> which
>>> spans
>>> across files. I believe there are cvs-to-svn converters as well.
>>>
>>> Something to think about for the future.
>>>
>>> -D
>>> --
>>> <gldnmean> Being around marketing could be interesting, if they're
>>> released
>>> into a death trap filled labyrinth while you hunt them for sport
>>>

[Adam Spiers]

Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@...> writes:
> In article <008601c42fd7$8dd16140$020110ac@...>,
> "Kevin Walsh" <kevin@...> wrote:
>
> > My vote would be to stick with the free (for all) CVS system.
>
> In point of fact, subversion is also free for all, GPL'd, etc. I like
> having a versioned directory structure, and I like being able to track
> revisions across file renames. Document properties (aka extended
> attributes) are also quite nifty.
>
> On the other hand, I've twice lost my subversion repository because
> something fouled up the BerkeleyDB files that hold the revision
> information.
>
> So I would also recommend sticking with CVS, but primarily for reasons
> of reliability. If something goes awry in CVS, you're more likely to
> lose a single file rather than your whole repository, and the fact that
> the RCS tools can be used on individual files means that there are more
> options for recovering from odd situations.

I would highly recommend you guys look at GNU arch:

http://gnuarch.org/

It answers all your concerns with CVS, subversion, perforce etc. -- it
is totally free (GPL), has atomic commits and an extremely simple,
lightweight repository format based on text files which is very hard
to foul up and easy to recover, fully supports changesets ... in short
all the features you'd expect from a modern versioning system. For
instance:

http://wiki.gnuarch.org/moin.cgi/Sub...dCvsComparison

Its real killer feature perhaps is how easy it makes branching and
collaboration via distributed archives (arch-speak for repositories).

It also has snowballing user- and developer-bases, and many 3rd party
associated tools are now emerging (see the wiki for links to these).

Adam

[Simon Ekstrand]

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 02:54:26PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
> I would highly recommend you guys look at GNU arch:
>
> http://gnuarch.org/

[...]

> Its real killer feature perhaps is how easy it makes branching and
> collaboration via distributed archives (arch-speak for repositories).

While not a slimserver developer, I would still like to second Adams
arch suggestion. It's distributed operation has saved me alot of time
and pain.

--
Simon

[dean]

This mostly affects folks with write access to the repository.

Any of you care to weigh in?

-dean

On May 4, 2004, at 2:56 AM, Simon Ekstrand wrote:

> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 02:54:26PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> I would highly recommend you guys look at GNU arch:
>>
>> http://gnuarch.org/
>
> [...]
>
>> Its real killer feature perhaps is how easy it makes branching and
>> collaboration via distributed archives (arch-speak for repositories).
>
> While not a slimserver developer, I would still like to second Adams
> arch suggestion. It's distributed operation has saved me alot of time
> and pain.
>
> --
> Simon
>
>

[kdf]

Quoting dean blackketter <dean (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com>:

> This mostly affects folks with write access to the repository.
>
> Any of you care to weigh in?

currently 210.

We use sourcesafe at work (which thankfully I don't have to deal with since I'm
a hardware guy). The software manager wants to move to perforce and include
documentation checkins, which would mean I'd have to learn that.

However, I'm a quick study, and I dont really care as long as I can run it from
Linux and its easily installable. If we get to a short list, I'll gladly try
one or two out and choose a preferred one. I haven't had the time to try evey
suggestion.

-kdf