Re: Re: CVS Access Method

Gregory Beaver wrote: > 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 would be up for trying out either Subversion or Mercurial, but I still > feel strongly that we need a dedicated server, or at least a server that > is not hosting pear.php.net to do this. Hi, A quick update: I'm not willing to consider using any distributed VCS at this time. Let's wait until the kinks are worked out before revisiting this question. Subversion, however, I would still consider. http://benjamin.smedbergs.us/blog/category/mercurial/ Greg