When will be CVS replaced by modern version control system?

[Karel Zak]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 10:02:04AM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> 
> Le Ven 9 novembre 2007 00:25, Karel Zak a écrit :
> 
> >  * __unfortunately__, we don't maintain source code in our VCS!
> 
> It's not unfortunate at all, the stuff in our VCS has not the same
> target as the stuff in upstream VCS and there needs to be a big red
> line between them.

 You can set the big red line in modern content trackers -- tags,
 branches and rebase are your friends. This is not problem.

> Releases happen upstream. Development happens upstream. Fedora rpm
> patches are an overlay of upstream work, need to be as limited and
> static as possible. Anything else is fork-receipe and short path to
> maintenance hell.

 We still maintain non-trivial number of non-upstream patches.

> And sure it is not very convenient for developpers, because
> developpers typically do not want to think about this stuff and would
> be happy to have their IDE directly plugged into production or user
> systems. But that's basic maintenance discipline that makes everyone
> else's life easier.

 I think the best way (for Fedora project) is Tom Mraz's suggestion:
 use stupid central CVS as a storage for patch files and locally use
 scripts that convert these patches as code to/from real DVCS.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak at redhat.com>