Here is the Source Forge reply to the earlier discussion about them
moving to Subversion. Thanks again to Kevin Hancock
<kevin@collab.net> for the forward.
----- Original Message -----
From: <noreply@sourceforge.net>
To: <noreply@sourceforge.net>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:12 PM
Subject: [alexandria - SF Offsite Talk] RE: SF2.5 Database ?
>
> Read and respond to this message at:
> http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=232197
> By: jbyers
>
> Mike,
>
> I think you are misunderstanding our position on Subversion as well
> as some background on the Subversion architecture.
>
> 1. SourceForge will use Subversion as an alternative to CVS. For
> many projects and organizations, there are compelling reasons for
> making this switch. However, you will have the freedom to choose CVS
> on a per-project basis.
>
> 2. The Subversion project has wisely chosen a narrow feature set for
> their 1.0 release. This first version uses Berkeley DB for storage.
> However, Subversion was architected with a very generic data storage
> layer -- made for alternate storage implementations. If you read
> through the subversion-dev list archives, you will find lots of
> interest in flat text file stores, SQL databases, etc. These
> features will likely be incorporated after 1.0.
>
> James Byers
> Director, SourceForge Engineering
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> You are receiving this email because you elected to monitor this forum.
> To stop monitoring this forum, login to SourceForge and visit:
> http://sourceforge.net/forum/monitor.php?forum_id=21304
>
------- End of forwarded message -------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:41 2006