Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 02 Feb 2008 23:49:10 +0800
From:      OutBackDingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>
To:        Adrian Penisoara <ady@freebsd.ady.ro>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
Subject:   Re: [OT] Q: what would you choose for a VCS today
Message-ID:  <1201967351.13273.6.camel@myhost>
In-Reply-To: <78cb3d3f0802011434p5bed2b1ex39320962f0bc8bf5@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <78cb3d3f0801302245v2183c613t6ecdd9acebbe9ef7@mail.gmail.com> <20080131110237.06860561@mbook.mired.org> <78cb3d3f0802011434p5bed2b1ex39320962f0bc8bf5@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I dont think I follow why people think its that hard to convert the
FreeBSD src tree to some other RCS with history, branches and tags

I have a FULL CVS conversion to a mercurial tree converted from a
February 1, 2008 CVS snapshot. I also have a Full CVS converted to
Subversion. And they have been to the best of my determinations thru
ongoing testing fully converted. Id be more then happy to have others
double check the integrity of both trees and see if something got
missed. I seem to think this is doable. Seeing as Ive done it. And
honestly Mercurial just rocks. Id prefer to host it externally if
someone had some space, over all both trees consume space but not that
incredibly awful. Any takers for testing?


On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 00:34 +0200, Adrian Penisoara wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Jan 31, 2008 6:02 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:45:55 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <ady@freebsd.ady.ro>
> > wrote:
> > >   Side-topic, if you bear with me: if you were to choose again what to
> > use
> > > as source revision control system (VCS) from today's offerings, what
> > would
> > > you choose to maintain FreeBSD's sources or a side-off project tracking
> > > FreeBSD as base that would allow better teams cooperation and easy code
> > > merging between projects/branches ?
> >
> > Pretty much any post-CVS VCS will do that. But if you want a good
> > merge facility, Perforce's are - well, after getting used to them,
> > everything else feels like throwing your code against the wall and
> > hoping the right parts stick. I talked to one of the git developers
> > about a year ago, and they were thinking about adding a guided merge
> > inspired by what Perforce does.
> >
> >
> I do trust you on Perforce being a strong contender for the job, but,
> unfortunately, looking at their licensing terms for OSS projects I do get
> some second thoughts. Perhaps that's why FreeBSD did not migrate mainstream
> sources over to P4 yet ;)...
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian Penisoara
> ROFUG / EnterpriseBSD
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1201967351.13273.6.camel>