Re: Fix to cvs2svn.py -p option for 1.0

kfogel@collab.net writes:

> It would be a terrible mistake to tie the release of Subversion
> 1.0 to the state of cvs2svn. If the rest of Subversion is
> ready, and cvs2svn is not, then we shouldn't wait for cvs2svn.

I couldn't agree more. But, i don't think that's what the
previous posters are talking about.

> We can ship with what we have, include a clear warning that
> cvs2svn is not done, and pointers to where to track its
> progress.

I'm sure the previous posters will correct me if i misrepresent
them, but that's exactly what i see them advocating. I don't
want to see Subversion 1.0 held up waiting for cvs2svn, but i
also don't want it to ship with an old cvs2svn. Subversion 1.0
should include the best cvs2svn we have, from the trunk.

This seems to be a recurring trend in these 1.0 discussions :).
Subversion ships with some side projects that are not maintained
on the same schedule, and sometimes not even by the same people.
Subversion itself has a certain set of requirements for its 1.0
release, and holding the bindings or cvs2svn to these
requirements is not constructive.

I really want to see Subversion 1.0 ship with the best cvs2svn
and bindings that we have available.

--
Eric Gillespie <*> epg@pretzelnet.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 8 20:37:23 2004