> This is total speculation but I'm sure the acquiring company wants to
> minimize redundancy and two version control systems are redundant.
> Why not migrate to SVN, because they don't have to and there will be
> cost and politics involved - the acquiring IT department would have to
> learn to administer new software they are unfamiliar with and
The company I work for aquired a company about a year ago. During the
due diligence it was determined that a lot of their IT and systems were
superior to what our current IT department was doing. So, when the close
occurred and system started to be consolidated most of the systems and
procedures happening in the "aquired" company were what we adopted. As a
matter of fact, one of the top guys at that company because our CTO.
So, I would hope that the same thing would occur during any merger.
Saying "we are the ones that bought you so it's our way or the highway"
isn't good business.
I would hope that the OP or principals of his organization are able to
compare svn to cvs and explain why they use that system and what they
would loose going to cvs.
Also, I see no reason why both systems can't be maintained. There is no
license cost to use/keep svn. So, it is entirely possible that the svn
system could be maintained. Converting from one system to another no
matter if you are going from cvs->svn or vice versa is disruptive and
I hope this works out for the best for the OP. Although from his message
I am pretty much assuming the decision has been made. Why else would he
be asking for help on how to do the conversion?
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-01-28 16:52:53 CET