[En-Nut-Discussion] Moving to Subversion

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi,

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de> wrote:
> Definitely. But we can be sure, that the Linux kernel development team
> don't use git because it is fashion.

Actually, they use it because they made it themselfs and it was
designed around their specific needs. The sending of patches around in
emails is very important to their development model, with different
maintainers, hundreds of specialized mailling lists, etc, while for us
it has never been. Patches are hard to come by, and often slip away if
not posted at the SF tracker.

> Yes and no. Definitely we have to make our own judgement. On the other
> hand you can't change a VCS easily so it is important to look to other
> project's decisions just to make sure that the selected VCS will have a
> long future.

Harald, that would be assuming that subversion developers counts how
many ppl use it and that they would just stop development had this
count gone down some magic number. That's not true, otherwise we would
have all moved to FreeRTOS (God forbid *smile*).

Ultimately it will be your decision as the project admin, but I hope
you take into consideration all of the raised points. IMHO, subversion
would serve us well and future support shouldn't be a concern if we
use it, since it is going strong.

Business will never switch to git for instance, as there is no user
control that we often require in the corporate world. Subversion has
it's own place, as has git or Mercurial and BitKeeper. There is no
reason to believe otherwise.

Kind Regards,
   Thiago A. Correa