gmane.editors.j.devel

Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

I would like to move ABCL from CVS to Subversion. Both are options
available from SourceForge.

The reason for this change is that I develop mainly on Windows. In
order to support my development efforts, I use Windows Explorer
plugins. For CVS, there's TortoiseCVS; for Subversion, there's
TortoiseSVN. TSVN is much better than TCVS (not being from the same
project, they resemble only in name and spirit).

Analyzing the project history and getting overview of commits - before
the commit - actually works great with TSVN.
Subversion is distributed rather widely with Linux distributions these
days (command line name 'svn').

Is there anybody with objections to this change?

 In all openness I should mention I'm a Subversion committer, however,
that's NOT why I'm proposing this change. The change is solely related
to supporting the development process on Windows. (Please note that
I'm not saying it currently doesn't work on Windows, I'm saying
Subversion works much better - for me.)

Bye,

Erik.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world

(Continue reading)

headers

Daniel White | 13 Aug 04:12

Re: Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:17:00 +0200
"Erik Huelsmann" <ehuels <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Is there anybody with objections to this change?

My interest in ABCL may only be passing so feel free to take my opinions
with a grain of salt.

How about considering a DVCS. DVCSs make it dead easy for anyone to
contribute to.

My preference is git, mostly because I tend to use it for most
projects now (even on Windows).  Regardless of my own biases, there are
better options if Windows is a major target.

Mercurial seems to play the nicest with Windows.  There is also a nice
Exploer extension, TortoiseHg (http://tortoisehg.sourceforge.net/).

As for hosting, there is a range of options (including SourceForge
hosting) here:
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/MercurialHosting

At the end of the day, though, _anything_ is better than CVS.

--

-- 
Daniel White

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes

(Continue reading)

headers

Robert Dodier | 13 Aug 17:46

Re: Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

--- On Tue, 8/12/08, Daniel White <daniel <at> whitehouse.id.au> wrote:

> How about considering a DVCS. DVCSs make it dead easy for
> anyone to contribute to.

-1 for DCVS. +1 for SVN. 

I won't bother trying to explain; the issues are largely 
religious on all sides anyway.

All the best

Robert Dodier

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

headers

Ville Voutilainen | 13 Aug 19:12

Re: Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Robert Dodier <robert_dodier <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Tue, 8/12/08, Daniel White <daniel <at> whitehouse.id.au> wrote:
>> How about considering a DVCS. DVCSs make it dead easy for
>> anyone to contribute to.
> -1 for DCVS. +1 for SVN.
> I won't bother trying to explain; the issues are largely
> religious on all sides anyway.

Ok, I'll bite. The most important thing wrt choosing a VCS is that it is one
that our maintainer (that would be Erik) is happy with. It's unlikely
that abcl will have massive parallel branch development, so the
possible shortcomings of SVN aren't likely to bite abcl development, nor
are the benefits of a DVCS likely to be reaped.

When there are more (much more) committers, this issue is maybe worth
discussing again - in the meantime, SVN is fine.

Just my 0.02.

-VJV-

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

headers

Erik Huelsmann | 13 Aug 20:51

Re: Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Ville Voutilainen
<ville.voutilainen <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Robert Dodier <robert_dodier <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
>> --- On Tue, 8/12/08, Daniel White <daniel <at> whitehouse.id.au> wrote:
>>> How about considering a DVCS. DVCSs make it dead easy for
>>> anyone to contribute to.
>> -1 for DCVS. +1 for SVN.
>> I won't bother trying to explain; the issues are largely
>> religious on all sides anyway.
>
> Ok, I'll bite. The most important thing wrt choosing a VCS is that it is one
> that our maintainer (that would be Erik) is happy with. It's unlikely
> that abcl will have massive parallel branch development, so the
> possible shortcomings of SVN aren't likely to bite abcl development, nor
> are the benefits of a DVCS likely to be reaped.

Thanks for your responses. To answer to Mark's question: yes,
retaining (and moving into the new VCS) the old history is vital to
me. I simply have to depend on that history too much for it to be cut
off.

Since nobody required us to stay with CVS, I'm now converting the
repository to Subversion. I'll try to get it online this week
[probably at common-lisp.net, I've had many positive reactions to that
already]. At the same time CVS will be cut off. I'll send a notice
when that happens.

Bye,

Erik.

(Continue reading)

headers

Mark Evenson | 13 Aug 09:32

Re: Moving ABCL from CVS to Subversion?

Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> I would like to move ABCL from CVS to Subversion. Both are options
> available from SourceForge.
> 
> The reason for this change is that I develop mainly on Windows. In
> order to support my development efforts, I use Windows Explorer
> plugins. For CVS, there's TortoiseCVS; for Subversion, there's
> TortoiseSVN. TSVN is much better than TCVS (not being from the same
> project, they resemble only in name and spirit).
> 
> Analyzing the project history and getting overview of commits - before
> the commit - actually works great with TSVN.
> Subversion is distributed rather widely with Linux distributions these
> days (command line name 'svn').
> 
> 
> Is there anybody with objections to this change?
> 

I would put in a request for moving to Mercurial (hg), but Subversion 
will be fine for the major shortcoming of CVS:  port 2401 outgoing is 
often block by over-zealous firewalls.  SourceForge has recently started 
to offer Mercurial.

Advantages to Mercurial?  Its one of those new-fangled distributed 
version control systems that all the kids are using these days.  For me 
the barrier to getting some changes you may want to commit back to the 
ABCL trunk seems easier somehow, as making a complete copy of the repo 
is only a local recursive directory copy.

(Continue reading)