Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)

On 25-Mar-04, at 12:25 AM, Dustin Sallings wrote:
> 	It's definitely not a magic tool that makes bad code good and 
> conflicting patches happy.  It solves other problems, though.

I don't think anything mentioned in this thread so far would be an 
enormous improvement over what we have now. However, I am still open to 
trying Arch or SVN: in the long run, I think the productivity gain from 
even an incremental improvement in the development toolset is worth a 
little effort in relearning and migration.

But as I said, I don't think it's a critical issue, and if other 
developers would rather we stick with what we have, that's fine with 
me.

WRT the relative merits of CVS, Arch, and SVN, David Wheeler (of 
Bricolage) has written an interesting article comparing the three 
systems:

     http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/scm.html

I think the lack of good Win32 support (unless rectified before the 
release of 7.5) is a pretty major problem with Arch -- that alone might 
be sufficient to prevent us from adopting it.

-Neil