any reason to stick to CVS?

Hi all,

I've been hearing a lot about SVN (subversion) recently and
Sourceforge 
is also supporting it.
It seems to me that SVN  is a good version control system
which do not 
have some of CVS' defects. It seems that SVN is all pluses.
So, is there 
any reason to continue using CVS?
Well, issues with porting from CVS to SVN aside. Assuming
that I start 
the project afresh, are there any reasons I should be using
CVS and not 
SVN besides personal taste and experience?

Thanks
maurice
_______________________________________________
melbourne-pug mailing list
melbourne-pugpython.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

We're using svn for all new projects here, mostly because
of trac -  
trac is a superb addition to any decent sized project, it
gives you a  
bunch of tools (wiki, etc) tied into the svn repo.

I can't see any reason to stick with cvs - even tortoise
for windows  
has an svn version.

KevinL

On 15/08/2006, at 3:04 PM, Maurice Ling wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I've been hearing a lot about SVN (subversion)
recently and  
> Sourceforge
> is also supporting it.
> It seems to me that SVN  is a good version control
system which do not
> have some of CVS' defects. It seems that SVN is all
pluses. So, is  
> there
> any reason to continue using CVS?
> Well, issues with porting from CVS to SVN aside.
Assuming that I start
> the project afresh, are there any reasons I should be
using CVS and  
> not
> SVN besides personal taste and experience?
>
> Thanks
> maurice
> _______________________________________________
> melbourne-pug mailing list
> melbourne-pugpython.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

KevinL
---
Obsidian Consulting Group
web: http://www.obsidian.com.a
u/
phone: +613 9355 7844 (ext 2001)
fax: +613 9350 4097


_______________________________________________
melbourne-pug mailing list
melbourne-pugpython.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 15:04 +1000, Maurice Ling wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've been hearing a lot about SVN (subversion)
recently and Sourceforge 
> is also supporting it.
> It seems to me that SVN  is a good version control
system which do not 
> have some of CVS' defects. It seems that SVN is all
pluses. So, is there 
> any reason to continue using CVS?
> Well, issues with porting from CVS to SVN aside.
Assuming that I start 
> the project afresh, are there any reasons I should be
using CVS and not 
> SVN besides personal taste and experience?

I had a lot of success converting an existing CVS repository
to SVN
using cvs2svn.  About the only downside I can think of that
that the SVN
repository is opaque, while CVS is transparent.  That is to
say, if you
know what you are doing you can muck around in the CVS
repository
directly (e.g. to remove all traces of a file ever
existing).  Doing so
in SVN is a lot harder.

Of course, many people would consider this a good thing 


  Cheers,

     Ryan

-- 
Ryan Kelly
http://www.rfk.id.au  | 
This message is digitally signed. Please visit
ryanrfk.id.au        |  http://www.rfk.id
.au/ramblings/gpg/ for details

_______________________________________________
melbourne-pug mailing list
melbourne-pugpython.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

Ryan Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 15:04 +1000, Maurice Ling wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been hearing a lot about SVN (subversion)
recently and Sourceforge 
>> is also supporting it.
>> It seems to me that SVN  is a good version control
system which do not 
>> have some of CVS' defects. It seems that SVN is
all pluses. So, is there 
>> any reason to continue using CVS?
>> Well, issues with porting from CVS to SVN aside.
Assuming that I start 
>> the project afresh, are there any reasons I should
be using CVS and not 
>> SVN besides personal taste and experience?
> 
> I had a lot of success converting an existing CVS
repository to SVN
> using cvs2svn.  About the only downside I can think of
that that the SVN
> repository is opaque, while CVS is transparent.  That
is to say, if you
> know what you are doing you can muck around in the CVS
repository
> directly (e.g. to remove all traces of a file ever
existing).  Doing so
> in SVN is a lot harder.
> 
> Of course, many people would consider this a good thing


Including me. Although, I accidentally put a list of ftp
passwords into 
svn once. Fortunately it was right at the beginning of the
project so I 
blew that repository away and started it again more
carefully. However, 
you could easily dump a repository, delete it, recreate it
and write a 
script to reload it from the dump, omitting any unwanted
files.

I wouldn't ever try to "muck" around in svn.
You can specify a file 
system (FSFS) repository instead of Berkeley (BDB) and if
you can find 
someone sufficiently expert he/she might be able to tweak
history. With 
FSFS you can tiptoe through the entire project with a text
editor.

Mike

> 
> 
>   Cheers,
> 
>      Ryan
> 
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------
------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> melbourne-pug mailing list
> melbourne-pugpython.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

_______________________________________________
melbourne-pug mailing list
melbourne-pugpython.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug

Mike Dewhirst wrote:
> Ryan Kelly wrote:
>   
>> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 15:04 +1000, Maurice Ling
wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've been hearing a lot about SVN (subversion)
recently and Sourceforge 
>>> is also supporting it.
>>> It seems to me that SVN  is a good version
control system which do not 
>>> have some of CVS' defects. It seems that SVN
is all pluses. So, is there 
>>> any reason to continue using CVS?
>>> Well, issues with porting from CVS to SVN
aside. Assuming that I start 
>>> the project afresh, are there any reasons I
should be using CVS and not 
>>> SVN besides personal taste and experience?
>>>       
>> I had a lot of success converting an existing CVS
repository to SVN
>> using cvs2svn.  About the only downside I can think
of that that the SVN
>> repository is opaque, while CVS is transparent. 
That is to say, if you
>> know what you are doing you can muck around in the
CVS repository
>> directly (e.g. to remove all traces of a file ever
existing).  Doing so
>> in SVN is a lot harder.
>>
>> Of course, many people would consider this a good
thing 
>>     
>
> Including me. Although, I accidentally put a list of
ftp passwords into 
> svn once. Fortunately it was right at the beginning of
the project so I 
> blew that repository away and started it again more
carefully. However, 
> you could easily dump a repository, delete it, recreate
it and write a 
> script to reload it from the dump, omitting any
unwanted files.
>   
Not if you want to preserve the history...

Cheers,
-T
_______________________________________________
melbourne-pug mailing list
melbourne-pugpython.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug