> In the end, we didn't find the cvn2svn:revnum too useful. No one ever
> needed that information, and when you think about it, the developers
> never referred to the CVS revision number anyway. They always used the
> log entry, the branch, or the tag which Subversion brings over anyway.
> If I had to do the conversion over, I'd simply leave it out.
> My whole point was a warning to others not to be seduced by this
> cvs2svn option.
Ok, thanks for the warning. We originally planned to take the revnum along. But now we discussed it again and figured it wouldn't be worth the trouble. So, following your advice ...