-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On May 3, 2007, at 10:37 AM, John Dennis wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 22:01 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
[ superb summary, snipped for brevity ]
Agreed!
I also agree with your assessment John. It's an evolutionary battle:
cvs ate rcs, svn ate cvs, and now the next generation is battling for
dominance. I think it's too early to pick a winner, the way cvs was
a clear win for so long, and svn was a no brainer after that.
If in the decision making process this concern could be taken into account I think it would be beneficial. By restricting the options to the SCM's which currently have the most mindshare the pain
threshold for developers would be mitigated and the project would have stronger assurances of on-going future support for the SCM.
Your point about interoperability is an important one, and definitely
a factor in the decision. I think the risk is mitigated by tools
like Tailor, and I have confidence that should we choose hg, bzr or
something else, we'll be able to fairly easily convert if a clear
winner emerges.
- -Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBRjn+4HEjvBPtnXfVAQIQdgP+JpcNOC+a5ZXanIF8NnL91a3mveR2rCu2 yemhPPv7HaJ7FyWKr7W9vAe1cyl7xG6lAsVvlARQNIyFyKxO76NvuZKb8mqUuUUz 7m+PPaJBW1uzTnmPQpxYPmWndZCkAQxjGzWZCNK9IkTg38RyrIIdzgzBqvY1XjAG ONadNBKUEU8= =Q/P4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----