Seeking initial reactions: Moving setup from CVS to Subversion?

[Max Bowsher]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 19 23:00, Robert Collins wrote:
>> I'm also not keen on this for several reasons:
>> * subversion doesn't address the issues with merging & distribution that
>> made it difficult for folk with long-running patches to stay in sync
>> * subversion appears to be a very fragile system (I'm working with quite
>> a few projects that involve subversion, and breakage is common).
>> * plus of course, that the rest of the project has shown no interest (at
>> this point) in moving.
>
> That's a fairly good summary.

I've already posted a reply addressing all three reluctances, so the above 
really isn't a summary of the current situation.

> I also don't see a reason to move to another sccs for this project.

I proposed that the ease of moving and renaming files, and the need for 
setup to do this, was a good reason. Do you disagree? If so, why?

> Also keep in mind that you're adding
> another burden to the overseers folks.  That's not worth it.

If the overseers deem subversion not to be useful to a wide enough audience 
for it to be worth their time administering yet, then I shall ask whether 
they would be willing to allow me to do run a subversion service for 
cygwin-setup - which I could do within an ordinary user account, without 
special privileges. It might be interesting as a pilot program for them.

Max.