directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Machols <>
Subject Re: Rethink Subversion
Date Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:02:02 GMT
On Mon, 2003-11-24 at 16:27, Daniel Rall wrote:
> +1 from me, meaning I'm willing to help ease those growing pains.  I spoke about 
> this a bit with Alex at ApacheCon, and he also seemed very interested in trying 
> out Subversion.
Thanks Daniel.  Here is how I would like to proceed, let me know what
you think.  

I have brought down our CVS tarball from sourceforge.  I will create a
local SVN report and use the cvs2svn to get the initial SVN repo

Once this is done, I will work on moving the directory structures to the
new layout (Which we still to define!).  This is the part I will
probably need some help with.

I will then run the conversion script to change the package names and
add the apache license header to the files.

I will probably only do this with one or two of the root level
directories.  Once it looks like everything works, we will do a code
freeze, and run the process for the entire CVS tarball, and bring the
new subversion repo in.
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > +1 from me, too.  And I say that knowing full well that we will have some
> > growing pains with Subversion.
> > 
> > I am cc'ing Greg and the infrastructure folks to give them a heads up that
> > we may need some help ASAP to get started, if no one objects to using
> > Subversion.
> > 
> > 	--- Noel
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Machols []
> > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 13:10
> > To: Apache Directory Developers List
> > Subject: Rethink Subversion
> > 
> > 
> > Guys,
> > 
> > I know we talked about this before, but I think we should think about
> > using subversion instead of CVS for the directory project.  The benefits
> > are becoming apparent now.  Right off the bat it will help with the
> > migration from source forge, plus the advantages of the Meta-data and
> > atomic check-ins.  I know there may be a small learning curve, but I
> > would rather do this now when we are changing infrastructure anyway,
> > than have to go through this in the future when we are worried more
> > important things: the releases, code, etc.
> > 
> > So I am a +1 to use Subversion instead of CVS.
> > 
> > Jeff

View raw message