Thomas D <koha@alinto.com>
[...] While the relatively small community of active Koha developers could learn to use a better tool than CVS, whatever that better choice might be, it would restrict the size of the development community to those who know or are willing to learn to use the superior software version control system. [...]
I agree with this conservative approach. It's not at all clear which system will "win" yet, but I agree with another poster that git looks like the best bet at the low level for now. Command compatibility isn't the whole story. There are other levels of compatibility and other problems (like svn's size increase and poor licence) which will need to be addressed. That is why I think git is looking good: there seems to be enough diversity developing that everyone will find something to please them. Being able to interoperate with a "mainline" copy in CVS will probably be a big feature of a winning tool, because CVS is on a *lot* of systems out there. Many of the next-gen' source control authors hate the idea, because CVS has such basic problems, but I think it will be needed... The only thing more basic, in my opinion, is to be able to produce tarballs and patches easily (as tar and patch are even more widespread), so people without any version control can still follow development easily, but koha doesn't do that today. For now, we keep watching and trying out in the background. I agree that mainline should stay in CVS. Best wishes, -- MJ Ray - personal email, see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ irc.oftc.net/slef Jabber/SIP ask