gnupic: Re: [gnupic] cvs updates
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] cvs updates
From:
Borut Razem ####@####.####
Date:
11 Mar 2006 21:53:36 +0000
Message-Id: <441346DC.1030000@siol.net>
Alex Holden wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2006, at 17:55, Scott Dattalo wrote:
>
>> SF recently announced support for SubVersion. Does anyone know if those
>> servers are more reliable? If so, should we consider moving over? I
>> know
>> one benefit is that there's no 3 or 4 hour delay between the developer
>> repository and the public repository.
>
>
> I like Subversion and use it locally for all my own projects, but I
> don't know anything about the reliability of Sourceforge's Subversion
> servers.
>
I also don't know anything about the reliability of svn on SF. I'm using
svn for my work and I'm quit satisfied with it. It has some nice
features: the most important (at least for me) is that directories are
also a part of the source control, so the history of deleted / renamed /
moved file or directory is not lost (which is not the case in CVS). I
think that the gpsim project is a good candidate for the move.
I'm thinking to propose the move for the sdcc project too, but it would
be much more complicated due to nightly snapshot builds...
Borut
