This passed to me by a co-worker (Kevin Hancock <email@example.com>),
who got it from a SourceForge mailing list.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 7:33 AM
Subject: [alexandria - SF Offsite Talk] RE: SF2.5 Database ?
> Read and respond to this message at:
> By: echlinm
> Moving to pgsql was because mysql doesn't have the features needed
> for Source Forge. Search the arcives of this news group for mysql to
> see why.
> But it gets worse folks, we are getting valinux to install as system
> here (I have 2.5 running but we decided it would be more efficient
> to have VA come set up the one wwe will use for more then a demo)
> and they tell us they are moving away from CVS to Subversion. As we
> know Subversion is not based on rcs like cvs is but uses a database
> for storing archives, no longer is there a single file for each file
> archived, but one large file for all archives. This leaves me in a
> bit of a problem since we actually use more then just cvs here but a
> number of other tools that are based on RCS which will leave me
> without the coice of those tools, forcing me to have to retrain all
> staff to use Subversion. Right now I can put my archive files in
> cvs but also maintain them using MKSSI (which has a lot more tools
> available for release management and reporting and metrics and even
> for file handling individual files while my users can use cvs, rsc,
> mkssi, csrcs ... and all be accessing the same archives with no
> problems. (You have to know how to make MKSSI not add the section
> to the archive that points back to the project.)
> You are receiving this email because you elected to monitor this forum.
> To stop monitoring this forum, login to SourceForge and visit:
------- End of forwarded message -------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:41 2006