Re: A Proposal to Move to Git

[NightStrike <nightstrike@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:05 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 9:03 AM,  <Paul_Koning@dell.com> wrote:
>> I've heard that the answer may be better in recent versions.   If not, you can consider Subversion instead, since it certainly has the ability.
>>
>
> Given that we have git mirror, I don't see the need to switch
> to subversion from CVS.  I don't use CVS for my binutils work
> anyway.

Subversion handles merging a lot better than CVS (svn merge
--reintegrate works very well).  It was written by people that worked
on CVS with CVS in mind, and so it's trivial to switch over (both in
terms of the repository as well as the users, ie the learning curve is
virtually nonexistent.)  Git users can easily use git-svn, which means
you can satisfy mostly everyone, and still be using current, well
maintained software.

Obviously, the die has already been cast, but there is something nice
about having a centralized server with decentralized clients.  Kind of
the best of both worlds.  I'm guessing nobody likes that idea, though
:)