Thoughts about converting libcdio to svn or git?

[R. Bernstein]

A while back there was some interest in converting the version control
system from CVS to subversion. I've also been using git (as well as
subversion) more and more and CVS annoyances are becoming more
bothersome.

Any thought or objections to moving to git or svn, the good folks at
Savannah will let us?

[Robert William Fuller]

R. Bernstein wrote:
> A while back there was some interest in converting the version control
> system from CVS to subversion. I've also been using git (as well as
> subversion) more and more and CVS annoyances are becoming more
> bothersome.
>
> Any thought or objections to moving to git or svn, the good folks at
> Savannah will let us?

Six in one, half dozen in the other.  Why not move to whichever one is
most popular in order to keep us all current?

[Peter Creath]

Either one is fine by me, though I think I lean towards svn for the
server.  Although git has some nice features for handling contributed
patches, I think svn is in wider use (and an easier transition from
CVS).

Also, if you use svn on the server, you can always use git locally to
track more granular changes.  This page has a good script for merging
a cluster of local changes from git into a single SVN checkin:
<http://blog.shinetech.com/?p=95>.

[Rocky Bernstein]

I received instructions from Savannah folks on how to convert the CVS
repository to git. I'll probably do this over the weekend sometime.

My thoughts on CVS, svn, and git. There really hasn't been any objection to
moving out of CVS, although some made mumblings about status quo. Git feels
faster than svn and works when one is disconnected from the Internet or
there is an outage on Savannah. I think there's been more activity in git
development recently than there has been on subversion.

In a project like libcdio where development is spotty, we want to encourage
others to use libcdio, develop it, contribute to it, or even fork it.  So
although as Peter says it is possible to use git on a subversion repository,
why make it harder to do so?

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Peter Creath
<pjcreath+libcdio@...<pjcreath%2Blibcdio@...>
> wrote:

> Either one is fine by me, though I think I lean towards svn for the
> server.  Although git has some nice features for handling contributed
> patches, I think svn is in wider use (and an easier transition from
> CVS).
>
> Also, if you use svn on the server, you can always use git locally to
> track more granular changes.  This page has a good script for merging
> a cluster of local changes from git into a single SVN checkin:
> <http://blog.shinetech.com/?p=95>.
>
>
>