Re: CVS to SVN Migration

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Richard Quadling <rquadling@googlemail.com> wrote: > > As a windows user my observations/opinions are ... .... taken with a grain of salt. ;-P Isn't discussion about how to add on to SVN and which tools will be better-suited for development a decade from now counterproductive to the idea at hand? SVN and CVS are the industry standard right now, with SVN being the better-supported and, in many ways, more economical and prudent approach. I'd be afraid that requiring existing and future developers to learn newer technologies would stall several aspects of the project, introduce many new problems, and hinder the advancement of the language as a whole. There's no reason other things couldn't be introduced at a later point, but my personal preference would be to approach the migration one step at a time. Making small bits of progress over time (while simultaneously being able to focus on PHP) seems to be more sensible than trying to radically change everything at once, negating a proven system in favor of "what might work better." -- </Daniel P. Brown> Better prices on dedicated servers: Intel 2.4GHz/60GB/512MB/2TB $49.99/mo. Intel 3.06GHz/80GB/1GB/2TB $59.99/mo. Dedicated servers, VPS, and hosting from $2.50/mo.