Kenneth Porter <shiva@sewingwitch.com> writes:
> Check out this thread on the Fedora-Developer list:
>
> <https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-December/msg00549.html>
>
> Extract from the 2nd message in the thread:
>
> >> Is there any discussions about using Subversion or GNU
> >> arch/Bazaar (http://bazaar.canonical.com/) instead of
> >> cvs for the repositories.
> >>
> >
> > Yes - Cristian Gafton did months of extensive testing to see if either
> > could stand up to the load of internal and external checkins on the
> > scale red hat does with distributions.
> >
> > He found that cvs was the only one to stand up to the load.
>
> It would be interesting to learn more about this testing. It may be
> that Gafton's issues are now addressed, or it may be that there's some
> useful stress-testing data that could be used to improve Subversion.
The real issue appears to be that they did the testing a year ago, due
to the need for advance planning. Plus the fact that CVS's problems
were familiar to everyone already. Christian Gafton says as much in
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-December/thread.html#00549
Here's the whole post, including his truly hilarious sig block:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cristian Gafton wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> > > Yes - Cristian Gafton did months of extensive
> > > testing to see if either
> > > could stand up to the load of internal and external
> > > checkins on the
> > > scale red hat does with distributions.
> > >
> > > He found that cvs was the only one to stand up to
> > > the load.
>
> > Ok thanks for the quick reply. are the results
> > available anywhere. It would be nice to let the
> > svn/arch developers know about this. I am pretty sure
> > they would be interested
>
> Please note - this was happening quite a long time ago as far as the
> developers for those projects are concerned.
>
> The first thing we had to do to enable this CVS repository was to redo
> the way we were handling the source packaging internally. That meant
> earlier this year making a decision about which source code management
> (SCM) platform offered the best mix of features, reliability, low cost
> of transition, performance and political acceptance. I looked at a lot
> of those SCMs.
>
> It all boiled down back to CVS because, while having some major
> shortcomings, which I am sure that the proponents of SVN and/or arch
> will quickly point out, it had a unique quality: everybody knows what
> is wrong with it.
>
> Plus, unlike traditional software projects, the needs for a
> packages/srpms repository are very few and somewhat fixed, so I could
> not grant bonus points for a lot of the more esotheric features of the
> other SCMs.
>
> That, coupled with reliability and readiness issues of other solutions
> kind of locked us into CVS. I am sure that a lot of the issues I ran
> into are now fixed, but as you all know by now, replacing
> infrastructure bits while keeping the development going takes a lot of
> time.
>
> It could very well be true that now the others are a better deal - but
> we asked that question back in January-March, we came out with this
> answer and we'll ride this one until it hits another critical
> point. At which point we will evaluate again and we will go through
> another season of pain...
>
> Cristian
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Cristian Gafton -- gafton redhat com -- Red Hat, Inc.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Linux is a leprosy; and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT
> industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software
> industry sector."
> -- Kenneth Brown, President, Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 17 19:55:23 2004