Sebastien Cevey wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:43:38PM +0300, Nuutti Kotivuori wrote:
>> I don't believe the subversion project will, or should, change
>> their basic goal for 1.0. But that doesn't mean that the project
>> cannot incorporate features that will enable it to function
>> otherwise as well.
>
> I agree with that, but I think that what Tom is afraid of is
> precisely not to be able to incorporate those additionnal features
> on the 1.0 basis. We all know that CVS problematic directory
> handling and so on comes from the very basis of the CVS design. This
> is why it has never been "fixed". It just could be fixed.
>
> I think that's why Tom suggested a redesign: he wanted to make sure
> that the very basis of subversion will be compatible with features
> he is talking about.
Let's say that it requires a redesign - a major one. That still
doesn't help one bit. Subversion 1.0 has to go out the door in a few
months, regardless.
Unless it can be said that the redesign can easily be completed before
1.0 would come out, I think it is a lot saner to get 1.0 out first,
and then do the redesign.
Ofcourse one can claim the point that getting an incomplete version
control system out there does more harm than good - but I don't buy
that. People need a CVS replacement - regarless of a better model for
the future.
-- Naked
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 11 16:23:23 2002