[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion use for Kernel work

From: David Waite <mass_at_akuma.org>
Date: 2003-02-26 18:12:41 CET

Other than this 'feature', were there other reasons that subversion
wasn't appropriate? Are there other large-scale open-source and free
software projects which have looked at subversion and given positive
feedback? And is this archived anyplace (such as the issue tracker)?

-David Waite

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:

>Bob Gustafson <bobgus@rcnChicago.com> writes:
>>At the moment, there does exist an opportunity for the Subversion community
>>to make a full court press on getting subversion adopted for kernel use.
>Many people have brought this issue up before privately, and I wanted
>to make a public my usual response.
>We talked to Linus long ago about Subversion and CVS, and the truth is
>that the CVS/SVN "model" of version control just isn't a good fit for
>his work habits. He is first and foremost a patch-juggler, shlepping
>patches to and fro, reviewing them, and trading them around with other
>kernel developers like baseball cards. And this is *exactly*
>Bitkeeper's distributed-repository working model. My impression is
>that Bitkeeper has made him an extremely happy camper, and CVS/SVN
>would not.
>So I don't think it would be wise for the Subversion community to go
>on a "full court press" to force Linus to use Bitkeeper. If his cadre
>of kernel hackers someday decide to stage a coup, that's their own
>business. :-)
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Feb 26 18:13:53 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.