Re: Re: CVS Access Method

Bertrand Mansion wrote:

Le 4 févr. 07 à 10:39, Anant Narayanan a écrit :

I also don't find there is enough added value in SVN to switch from CVS. In many cases, SVN is worse than CVS. It won't fit what we need in PEAR IMO. If we were to change, other solutions should also be considered and more modern solutions like a distributed version control system should be tested. I have tested Mercurial and it's great. I think BZR is nice too. I heard that DARCS is excellent. SVN, just like CVS, are things from the past. Did you ever try a distributed version control system before ?

I've used both git and darcs before; and needless to say that the convenience of distributed version control is unbeatable. So yes, I for one, would love it if we actually use one of these modern VCS: Either git, darcs or bzr.

If you know Git and Darcs, you should really give Mercurial a try :)

I've never used any of those in a distributed environment (i use darcs when i need a quickly setup local source control on a box) but they sure look interesting. The fact that we would not really need extra hardware is a plus. Maybe we should give it a try. It will require people to learn a new set of tools so it will take time. From a theoritical point of view, a distributed version control might fit pear's bill quite nicely. Arnaud.