GIT and CVS

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Phil Muldoon wrote:

> So why are we still on CVS?  I'm not a release manager, so I do not have

Because the complications associated with having many projects in the same 
repository are a lot of work to disentangle, and it is a lot of work to do 
the conversion (including all the infrastructure scripts, user 
instructions etc.) for any one project.

I think binutils+gdb is the right unit to aim for getting into a separate 
repository, as discussed in 
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-03/msg00486.html>.

> far, far quicker than CVS.  Maybe with the stronger identity and
> information that comes with GIT logs we can finally retire
> ChangeLogs.

ChangeLogs are very useful whatever the version control system; it's 
routine to import snapshots from one system into another and the 
ChangeLogs are readily available to see what source version you actually 
have there.  ChangeLogs are convenient to grep and much less I/O intensive 
than git operations are (especially when your checkout is on NFS).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com