Re: cvs access methods

[Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com>]

Ross McFarland <rwmcfa1 neces com> writes:

> i'm a member of the Gtk2-Perl team which currently uses sourceforge for
> most of the project hosting. we'd talked about and would like to switch
> to gnome.org and at this point have decided to look into actually
> moving. that being said one of the oft used sf abilities (for two of the
> developers) is cvs through ssh. which allows us to get out from work
> (behind a corporate firewall.) reading around i didn't see anything that
> indicated developer access through ssh was supported, did i miss
> something?

It's currently supported, and we're moving to an ssh-only setup in the
long run.  I can't imagine that there's any reason why we couldn't get
you space on the GNOME server.

> on a somewhat related note, has any thought been given to
> providing/using subversion. if gnome.org provided svn through http or
> ssh we'd switch in a heartbeat. we (a few people) have been using it at
> work for a year and a half now and now find ourselves squarely in the
> svn fan-club. it took us a few months to wrap our heads around what was
> so great about subversion (other than the obvious features) but once we
> did, cvs leaves us wanting.

Our current opinion is that source control systems is a GNOME-wide
project decision that needs to be made.  One of the real strengths of
the current CVS is that it is consistent.  Everyone (coders,
translators, documenters, etc) can access it in one way.  If we start
allowing alternate version controls (svn, arch, monotone, etc.), we'll
get a fragmented system.  I wouldn't be surprised if the project as a
whole moved in some direction in the next couple years, but it's not the
sysadmin team's call.

Thanks,
-Jonathan