[Alsaplayer-devel] alsaplayer.org and possible migration

[Jack O'Quin]

On 2/9/07, Dominique Michel <dominique.michel at citycable.ch> wrote:
>
> It seem at both have pros and cons. cvs seem to be more flexible as svn, with
> things as doing a tag. A tag will also take less space with cvs as svn. I can
> be wrong, I am still learning both of them. I personally don't care which
> system we are using in the future as long as it work and I can find my way
> through, but I have more urgent think to do now as a cvs to svn migration.

I've been using both CVS and SVN for a while now.  I consider SVN much
more flexible, especially in its use of tags and branches.  Tags are
very efficient, because SVN can "logically copy" an entire subtree
cheaply, O(1).  Another big advantage is its ability to move files
around and rename directories without losing (or mixing up) their
change histories.

The main advantage of CVS is that it is already in place.  As you say,
there are more urgent things to do right now.

For me, the decision has come down to a tradeoff between the
advantages of SVN versus the effort to migrate.  Of the projects I am
involved in, active projects (like JACK) have been worth migrating,
while those with low rates of change (like JAMin) so far have not.
-- 
 joq