From: Roy S. <roy...@ic...> - 2007-10-24 04:09:54
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Roy Stogner wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Benjamin Kirk wrote: > >> $ svn co https://libmesh.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/libmesh/trunk/libmesh >> >> Should do the trick... >> >> Consider CVS deprecated. I'll post something more informative to both user >> and devel lists once I figure out now to use this. > > "We're going to get rid of it eventually" deprecated or "Your CVS > commits are now going to /dev/null" deprecated? ;-) "Your CVS commits are now going to /dev/null" deprecated, as far as I can tell. I'll copy this to libmesh-users, just in case anyone using anonymous CVS starts wondering why "cvs update" has suddenly stopped finding any updated files. We should probably update the web pages too. --- Roy |
From: Ondrej C. <on...@ce...> - 2007-10-24 09:51:15
|
> >> $ svn co https://libmesh.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/libmesh/trunk/libmesh > >> > >> Should do the trick... > >> > >> Consider CVS deprecated. I'll post something more informative to both user > >> and devel lists once I figure out now to use this. > > > > "We're going to get rid of it eventually" deprecated or "Your CVS > > commits are now going to /dev/null" deprecated? ;-) > > "Your CVS commits are now going to /dev/null" deprecated, as far as I > can tell. I'll copy this to libmesh-users, just in case anyone using > anonymous CVS starts wondering why "cvs update" has suddenly stopped > finding any updated files. We should probably update the web pages > too. BTW, when you are at it, I strongly suggest some decentralized version control system, basically either mercurial or git. In SymPy we are just in the process of moving from svn to Mercurial, you can read why here: http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/Mercurial svn is good, it works well, but mercurial is just better in every aspect (my opinion). Ondrej |
From: Benjamin S. K. <ben...@na...> - 2007-10-24 14:40:47
|
> BTW, when you are at it, I strongly suggest some decentralized version > control system, basically either mercurial or git. In SymPy we are > just in the process of moving from svn to Mercurial, you can read why > here: > > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/Mercurial > > svn is good, it works well, but mercurial is just better in every > aspect (my opinion). I don't doubt that... However, the ubiquity of cvs/subversion outweighs any drawbacks to centralized control in my mind. I work on enough exotic supercomputers that this is a real benefit. Almost any platform I go to these days already has cvs/svn installed. It is really a drag to have to install your own version control software everywhere you go just to access the software you are *really* trying to install. |
From: John P. <pet...@cf...> - 2007-10-24 16:17:37
|
Benjamin S. Kirk writes: > > > BTW, when you are at it, I strongly suggest some decentralized version > > control system, basically either mercurial or git. In SymPy we are > > just in the process of moving from svn to Mercurial, you can read why > > here: > > > > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/Mercurial > > > > svn is good, it works well, but mercurial is just better in every > > aspect (my opinion). > > I don't doubt that... However, the ubiquity of cvs/subversion outweighs > any drawbacks to centralized control in my mind. I work on enough > exotic supercomputers that this is a real benefit. Almost any platform > I go to these days already has cvs/svn installed. It is really a drag > to have to install your own version control software everywhere you go > just to access the software you are *really* trying to install. Besides the compatibility issues, going away from cvs/svn would probably also mean leaving sourceforge, since those are (AFAIK) the only two SCM softwares they support. The visibility of libmesh and the download and statistics services sf provides have been well worth the cost, in my opinion. I know there is growing momentum in the area of distributed SCM, and it is very useful to developers without write access, so it seems it can't be long before some form of it is supported by sourceforge. -J |
From: Ondrej C. <on...@ce...> - 2007-10-24 16:56:16
|
> Besides the compatibility issues, going away from cvs/svn would > probably also mean leaving sourceforge, since those are (AFAIK) the > only two SCM softwares they support. The visibility of libmesh and > the download and statistics services sf provides have been well > worth the cost, in my opinion. > > I know there is growing momentum in the area of distributed SCM, and > it is very useful to developers without write access, so it seems it > can't be long before some form of it is supported by sourceforge. Right, I understand your arguments. I just wanted to mention this alternative, because I think you will be changing the revision control once again soon. :) Ondrej |
From: Ondrej C. <on...@ce...> - 2007-10-31 13:52:55
|
> Besides the compatibility issues, going away from cvs/svn would > probably also mean leaving sourceforge, since those are (AFAIK) the > only two SCM softwares they support. The visibility of libmesh and I joust found: http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/MercurialOnSourceforge Ondrej |