You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU> on 2004/08/13 22:43:03 UTC
Subversion uptake in OSS projects
I noticed that Subversion is starting to get some substantial use in
OSS projects, and did a little research on how that comes about and
how successful it tends to be. For each project listed at
http://subversion.tigris.org/propaganda.html, I tried to determine how
the decision was made to switch to SVN, when they switched, and
what difficulties they've been having. Here are my findings:
* Apache: Apache is, of course, pretty closely tied to the SVN
project. Greg Stein set up an SVN repository for Apache in early
2003 and they have been converting projects over piece by piece.
I know they've had problems with wanting shared working copies, as
well as issues with wanting to have commits which aren't
date-ordered on account of doing CVS conversions of multiple CVS
projects into the same SVN repository.
* Samba: This project very briefly discussed converting to SVN in
February (I have to assume most of the real discussion happened
off-list) and converted to SVN in April. They mentioned one
unspecified BDB issue in June requiring recovery, but otherwise I
haven't seen any indications of difficulties.
* Zope: They discussed an SVN conversion in April, with no
objections, and converted in May--not just to using Subversion to
host their own code, but as part of the Zope system as well. They
were initially mildly disappointed that cvs2svn did not handle
line-endings, and that our auto-props story for automatically
setting svn:eol-style isn't very good. I saw one report of a
"Cannot Allocate Memory" BDB issue in June which required
recovery, but that's it.
* xiph.org: They converted in July, based on a look at their
repository. The xiph.org founder is a friend of mine, so I assume
that was a motivating factor. I couldn't find any mailing list
discussion about it; I think most of their chatter happens on IRC.
* Debian: Debian is a huge community. They offer CVS, SVN, and arch
hosting. SVN hosting appears to be somewhat popular, but it's
hard to tell since many people host their repositories privately
(there's no requirement that you do Debian work under any kind of
central version control, and many people don't use version control
at all). They do have some loud arch advocates, and to some
extent arch fits the Debian-package-maintainer model better on
account of better merging support. One of my Debian developer
friends uses svk for that reason. As early adopters, Debian had
problems with svn 0.x incompatibilities, have also reportedly had
difficulties with hanging svnserve processes (BDB problems, I
would assume), and one project has reportedly had difficulties
with people accidentally checking out the full project tree with
all branches, causing significant server load.
* Conectiva: I couldn't find much information about Conectiva due to
the language barrier, but they do have a glowing testimonial on
our propaganda page, have been using Subversion since August 2002,
and have a ginormous repository.
* Trac: Trac has always used Subversion as far as I can tell (since
project inception, which I think was around August 2003), and like
Zope, they don't just use it to host their own code, but also as
part of their system. I saw no obvious indications of problems on
their mailing list.
* GNUe: GNUe converted their repository in December 2003. They
considered both svn and arch, but lacked a strong arch advocate.
CVS history conversion and partial checkouts appeared important to
them. I found no particular indications of difficulties.
* LFS: LFS initially discussed conversion to SVN in March. A
Bitkeeper advocate piped up, but several people did not like the
Bitmover license. There appeared to be no strong Arch advocate
within the project. In May, they announced a project to evaluate
SCM systems; the mailing list for this project (lfs-scm-testing)
appears to be defunct, so I can't see how it went. Cheap branches
appeared to be a big motivator. In June, they converted the LFS
Book sources (their main project). They initially had BDB
permissions problems, but appear to have solved them. In August,
they've been encountering a lot of "Cannot allocate memory" BDB
issues, and are planning to switch to FSFS after 1.1 comes out.
Of course, there are also the projects which have considered switching
but didn't, or who switched to different version control tools. These
are harder to identify. The ones I know about are:
* gcc: Paralyzed by a mix of advocates of various version control
systems (mostly Arch and Subversion). Past conversations have
generally devolved into a long list of requirements, most not
satisfied by any version control tool.
* Linux kernel: As everyone knows, the Linux kernel is pretty wedded
to Bitkeeper, and that seems unlikely to change. The key
developers have no great qualms about the BK license, and BK was
pretty much designed to closely fit the Linux development model,
whereas Subversion is a rather poor fit for it.
* NetBSD: (Most of the relevant discussion has happened on a closed
mailing list, so I can't comment on it, and I'm not on that list
any more so I'd be out of date anyway. Nothing too exciting here;
they're a big project with lots of inertia.)
As an aside, I'd be interested to hear about mid-sized or larger OSS
projects using Arch, and how successful they are. The only one I
currently know about is Xouvert, which appears never to have gotten
off the ground. (The gnuarch.org user-community page hasn't been
responding today, or I might have more information there.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by "Bruce A. Mah" <bm...@acm.org>.
On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 11:21, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if FreeBSD has any plans to migrate from CVS. I know they
> > have a bunch of core people lurking on here (hi!).
There's also a few of us "normal" committers here too. :-) (Hi!)
> I know they also
> > have a perforce setup, but I'm not clear how it interacts with their CVS
> > setup.
>
> The current HEAD version from CVS is imported nightly into Perforce
> IIRC. People mainly use the Perforce depot for doing personal
> development on branches, with an eye towards merging their changes into
> CVS eventually. The 'official' version of the code always lives in CVS.
Actually, that's more like hourly but everything else you said is
correct.
Cheers,
Bruce.
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> I'm not sure if FreeBSD has any plans to migrate from CVS. I know they
> have a bunch of core people lurking on here (hi!). I know they also
> have a perforce setup, but I'm not clear how it interacts with their CVS
> setup.
The current HEAD version from CVS is imported nightly into Perforce
IIRC. People mainly use the Perforce depot for doing personal
development on branches, with an eye towards merging their changes into
CVS eventually. The 'official' version of the code always lives in CVS.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Tuesday, August 17, 2004 3:58 PM -0700 Russ Allbery <rr...@stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Debian, unlike something like FreeBSD, has no monolithic version control
> tree, and probably will always use multiple revision control systems as
> befits the personal preferences of various developers.
My only point was that there is a large group of Debian Developers now
using arch/tla (whatever it is called today) to positive reviews. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Russ Allbery <rr...@stanford.edu>.
Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com> writes:
> FWIW, Canonical Software (<http://www.no-name-yet.com/>) (Mark
> Shuttleworth's new Debian company) is using tla exclusively to rave
> reviews from those involved. So, I'd expect momentum from those Debian
> Developers involved to switch Debian over to tla.
I don't know what "switch Debian over to tla" would even mean. Different
Debian package maintainers are actively using all of CVS, Subversion, svk,
and arch, as fitting their personal preferences, as well as likely many
other things, and there are packages specifically to support multiple
different systems (cvs-buildpackage, svn-buildpackage, tla-buildpackage,
and arch-buildpackage, the latter two being two different takes on how to
do things with arch). I believe both Subversion and CVS are supported on
alioth, and it wouldn't surprise me if arch was as well.
Debian, unlike something like FreeBSD, has no monolithic version control
tree, and probably will always use multiple revision control systems as
befits the personal preferences of various developers.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
--On Friday, August 13, 2004 6:43 PM -0400 Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>
wrote:
> * Debian: Debian is a huge community. They offer CVS, SVN, and arch
> hosting. SVN hosting appears to be somewhat popular, but it's
FWIW, Canonical Software (<http://www.no-name-yet.com/>) (Mark
Shuttleworth's new Debian company) is using tla exclusively to rave reviews
from those involved. So, I'd expect momentum from those Debian Developers
involved to switch Debian over to tla.
I'm not sure if FreeBSD has any plans to migrate from CVS. I know they
have a bunch of core people lurking on here (hi!). I know they also have a
perforce setup, but I'm not clear how it interacts with their CVS setup.
I also know that OSAF (Chandler, etc.) is in the process of evaluating SCM
solutions. I think they only seriously considered tla and svn. I'm not
sure if they've come to a conclusion yet. -- justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Saturday 14 August 2004 00.43, Greg Hudson wrote:
...
> * LFS: LFS initially discussed conversion to SVN in March. A
...
> permissions problems, but appear to have solved them. In August,
> they've been encountering a lot of "Cannot allocate memory" BDB
> issues, and are planning to switch to FSFS after 1.1 comes out.
FWIW:
The reason of the "Cannot allocate memory" was probably that APU (apache)
was linked against db-4.1 and Subversion was linked against db-4.2.
In other words: -ERROR 0.5
J.
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Nicolás Lichtmaier <ni...@reloco.com.ar>.
> * Conectiva: I couldn't find much information about Conectiva due to
> the language barrier, but they do have a glowing testimonial on
> our propaganda page, have been using Subversion since August 2002,
> and have a ginormous repository.
>
>
If you point me where to read I can summarize it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk>.
Looks like they have it working now :-)
Morten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Kapil Thangavelu <ha...@objectrealms.net> writes:
> i helped setup the repo, and they are aware of the problem, there
> continue to be bdb issues there, due to redhat enterprise 3 support
> issues with upgrading bdb to 4.2 (currently at 4.1), ditto for
> deviating from 'supported' apache builds. i'm going to try and see if
> the svn components and deps alone can be upgraded from source in some
> sandbox directory, or failing that getting suse enterprise on the
> system.
>
> its not clear that upgrades only will help considering the bdb issues
> that have been prevalent with the lastest stable software versions of
> svn and its deps (see my other email on this thread for notes on
> plone/zope.org svn setup issues)
You already know about FSFS, so I won't make the obligatory suggestion
there.
But also, it might help to know that I've had no trouble with
Subversion repositories on RedHat or other boxes that already had some
flavor of BDB and/or APR installed, as long as I make sure to install
Berkeley from source (remembering to add /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.2/lib
to /etc/ld.so.conf), then build Apache and APR/APR-UTIL from source
(making sure they configured against the new BDB), then build
Subversion (making sure it configures against all of the above)...
Well, now that I write it out, it does seem a bit intricate :-). But
it has worked reliably.
Good luck! If you can think of any steps we can take to make these
problems less common (for those sticking with BDB), please share them.
I just checked out the ingres3 repository, by the way.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Kapil Thangavelu <ha...@objectrealms.net>.
i helped setup the repo, and they are aware of the problem, there
continue to be bdb issues there, due to redhat enterprise 3 support
issues with upgrading bdb to 4.2 (currently at 4.1), ditto for
deviating from 'supported' apache builds. i'm going to try and see if
the svn components and deps alone can be upgraded from source in some
sandbox directory, or failing that getting suse enterprise on the
system.
its not clear that upgrades only will help considering the bdb issues
that have been prevalent with the lastest stable software versions of
svn and its deps (see my other email on this thread for notes on
plone/zope.org svn setup issues)
-kapil
On Aug 17, 2004, at 8:52 PM, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk> writes:
>>>> CA has recently released Ingres as Open Source
>>>> (http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres), and they are using a SVN
>>>> for source code control. Might this be something for the propoganda
>>>> page?
>>
>>> Yes -- but only if it's working :-).
>>
>> I should have checked that :-) Let's hope they get the problem fixed!
>
> I've registered there so I can post in one of their forums asking
> about the problems (my mail to svn-admin@ingres.com seems not to have
> worked).
>
> -Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk> writes:
> >>CA has recently released Ingres as Open Source
> >>(http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres), and they are using a SVN
> >>for source code control. Might this be something for the propoganda
> >>page?
>
> >Yes -- but only if it's working :-).
>
> I should have checked that :-) Let's hope they get the problem fixed!
I've registered there so I can post in one of their forums asking
about the problems (my mail to svn-admin@ingres.com seems not to have
worked).
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk>.
kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk> writes:
>
>
>>CA has recently released Ingres as Open Source
>>(http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres), and they are using a SVN
>>for source code control. Might this be something for the propoganda
>>page?
>>
>>
>
>Yes -- but only if it's working :-).
>
>
>
I should have checked that :-) Let's hope they get the problem fixed!
Morten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk> writes:
> CA has recently released Ingres as Open Source
> (http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres), and they are using a SVN
> for source code control. Might this be something for the propoganda
> page?
Yes -- but only if it's working :-).
At http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres/subversion, I read that
the repository is at
http://svn.ingres.com/svn/repos
But when I tried to browse there, it just errors, saying "Could not
open the requested SVN filesystem."
I hope if CA/Ingres is having problems with Subversion, they'll mail
the users@ list (I haven't checked there yet today, but will soon).
I've CC'd svn-admin@ingres.com just in case they don't know about the
problem.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Morten Ludvigsen <mo...@2ps.dk>.
Damn! Did it again - replied to the message so that only Greg got it.
Here goes again:
CA has recently released Ingres as Open Source
(http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres), and they are using a SVN for
source code control. Might this be something for the propoganda page?
Morten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Michael Sweet <mi...@easysw.com>.
Greg Hudson wrote:
> I noticed that Subversion is starting to get some substantial use in
> OSS projects, and did a little research on how that comes about and
> how successful it tends to be. For each project listed at
> http://subversion.tigris.org/propaganda.html, I tried to determine how
> the decision was made to switch to SVN, when they switched, and
> what difficulties they've been having. Here are my findings:
> ...
FWIW, we are seriously considering switching to SVN for all of our
software, both open (CUPS, EPM, ESP Ghostscript, FLTK, HTMLDOC,
Mini-XML), and closed (ESP Print Pro). We've been doing a lot of
testing internally, and will probably use 1.1.x and fsfs. We
haven't had a lot of luck with bdb - mainly the RedHat vs. Berkeley
DB mismatch issues - and like the idea of having real files in case
something goes screwy.
The major reasons we're considering it are:
1. Better off-line development - with CVS we use scripts to
handle off-line add/remove, but we don't have off-line
diff capabilities.
2. We can setup developer access without local accounts;
with CVS, the only way to do this is with pserver, which
isn't secure. With SVN, we can use svnserve or mod_svn
and open up our development to third-parties when it
makes sense to do so (right now everything is "file an
issue with a patch" to contribute...)
3. Speed; SVN feels faster then CVS for all of the common
operations (commit, diff, branching, merging)
4. Easier module management; right now we do symlink tricks
in our repository to import modules into a source tree.
This will no longer be necessary with SVN, and will make
managing the repository a lot easier.
Thanks for creating SVN!
--
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products mike at easysw dot com
Printing Software for UNIX http://www.easysw.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Travis P <sv...@castle.fastmail.fm>.
On Aug 16, 2004, at 10:23 AM, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Watching the Subversion users@ and dev@ lists, we very rarely see
> people converting from plain RCS repositories. The vast majority are
> coming from CVS, plus the usual assortment of VSS, Perforce, etc.
I seem to recall one or two people asking in 2004. Given the details
of their usage (straight-forward RCS), they were advised (by others
on the list) how to almost trivially convert their RCS into a
CVS repository and then use cvs2svn.
-Travis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by "Eric S. Raymond" <es...@thyrsus.com>.
kfogel@collab.net <kf...@collab.net>:
> My conjecture is, the reason we don't hear about it is simply that
> such repositories are extremely rare these days. Most places that
> were using straight RCS did the obvious thing and converted to CVS
> long ago.
I would have assumed this myself until my conversation with Paula. I
thought I was an isolated holdout, and my judgment that moving to CVS
would not be worth the effort I though to be an exceptional one.
The fact that the *first person* with whom the topic came up reported
the identical problems impressed me. Perhaps more than is warranted;
maybe Paula and I are both exceptions and the dice came up snake-eyes.
But I no longer think so.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Martin Furter <mf...@rola.ch>.
On 16 Aug 2004 kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Watching the Subversion users@ and dev@ lists, we very rarely see
> people converting from plain RCS repositories. The vast majority are
> coming from CVS, plus the usual assortment of VSS, Perforce, etc.
I converted about 80MB of an MKS/SI archive. MKS/SI 7.5 is basically RCS
with some very simple multiuser support (stores archive on a network
share).
We didn't use branches just because using them was a pain. For converting
the archives i used cvs2svn of some pre-1.0 release. The only thing i
didn't convert was binary files, but they were not important for us.
The only incompatibility was 3 additional lines i had to remove from each
archive file before running cvs2svn.
After importing the remaining projects we have now a repos of about 350MB.
Everyone here loves svn, it's much faster than MKS/SI, has real network
support so we can update our working copies at home via ssh tunnel and
we're now able to use branches and tags :)
Thank you to everyone working on subversion or related parts, subversion
is really great!
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net> writes:
> Interesting. From the beginning, our goal has always been to take over
> the CVS user base... based on the assumption, of course, that most
> open-source projects use nothing but CVS. But it sounds like there's a
> whole separate base of people still using RCS in government, academia,
> or research. (Wasn't that what CVS was trying to replace?) Maybe
> someone should start an rcs2svn project.
Let's be careful not to jump to conclusions.
Watching the Subversion users@ and dev@ lists, we very rarely see
people converting from plain RCS repositories. The vast majority are
coming from CVS, plus the usual assortment of VSS, Perforce, etc.
Except for Eric Raymond's mention of himself and Paula Matuszek, I
don't recall any other instances of conversions from straight RCS
trees. (I could be forgetting one or two, but I'm pretty sure that if
this had been posted about with any regularity at all, I'd remember at
least a few of the instances.)
My conjecture is, the reason we don't hear about it is simply that
such repositories are extremely rare these days. Most places that
were using straight RCS did the obvious thing and converted to CVS
long ago.
That conjecture might be right or wrong, I don't know. One thing we
can tell for sure, though, is that if there *are* a lot of plain RCS
repositories out there, they haven't been posting much to the
Subversion lists (modulo Eric just now).
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by "Eric S. Raymond" <es...@thyrsus.com>.
Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>:
> Interesting. From the beginning, our goal has always been to take over
> the CVS user base... based on the assumption, of course, that most
> open-source projects use nothing but CVS. But it sounds like there's a
> whole separate base of people still using RCS in government, academia,
> or research. (Wasn't that what CVS was trying to replace?) Maybe
> someone should start an rcs2svn project.
For a lot of solo project, CVS's added features aren't worth the hassle.
I now suspect there is a vast dark mass of RCS troglydites like Paula
and myself out there for whom Subversion would be very tempting if
the conversion were easy.
I gave serious thought to whether a separate rcs2svn was desirable before
uttering my RFC. My conclusion was, and remains, not. About 85% of what
it would need to do is shared with cvs2svn.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>.
On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 08:03, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> That RCS merge-by-symbol issue I've been banging on about? That was,
> apparently, a big part of the pain in the butt. I suspect Paula's and
> my experience is typical, and that more powerful and flexible RCS-to-SVN
> tools would do much to speed up adoption.
Interesting. From the beginning, our goal has always been to take over
the CVS user base... based on the assumption, of course, that most
open-source projects use nothing but CVS. But it sounds like there's a
whole separate base of people still using RCS in government, academia,
or research. (Wasn't that what CVS was trying to replace?) Maybe
someone should start an rcs2svn project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by "Eric S. Raymond" <es...@thyrsus.com>.
Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>:
> I noticed that Subversion is starting to get some substantial use in
> OSS projects, and did a little research on how that comes about and
> how successful it tends to be. For each project listed at
> http://subversion.tigris.org/propaganda.html, I tried to determine how
> the decision was made to switch to SVN, when they switched, and
> what difficulties they've been having.
I can add one story about Subversion uptake in a non-open-source context.
One of my best friends is a computer scientist named Paula Matuszek. She
runs an AI group that supports drug discovery at SmithKline Beecham, a
large pharmaceutical company. They use open source extensively for their
development work.
She reports that they switched to Subversion from RCS/CVS a few months back.
She said the initial conversion and setup was a pain in the butt, but that
they have been extremely happy with Subversion since. "Very nice," she
says. "Much cleaner and more natural than CVS."
That RCS merge-by-symbol issue I've been banging on about? That was,
apparently, a big part of the pain in the butt. I suspect Paula's and
my experience is typical, and that more powerful and flexible RCS-to-SVN
tools would do much to speed up adoption.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Kapil Thangavelu <ha...@objectrealms.net>.
plone.org is also using svn (svn.plone.org). some folks have been
maintaining darcs repository mirrors, and a few also use svk against the
svn repo.
both zope and plone have been having svn bdb issues recently. zope.org
recently turned off viewcvs in an attempt to help the situation, and
both are considering moving to svn fsfs as soon as 1.1 goes gold.
also the ingres source (http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres) is
currently hosted via svn, although bdb issues there are making them
reconsider it.
cheers,
-kapil
On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 18:43, Greg Hudson wrote:
> * Zope: They discussed an SVN conversion in April, with no
> objections, and converted in May--not just to using Subversion to
> host their own code, but as part of the Zope system as well. They
> were initially mildly disappointed that cvs2svn did not handle
> line-endings, and that our auto-props story for automatically
> setting svn:eol-style isn't very good. I saw one report of a
> "Cannot Allocate Memory" BDB issue in June which required
> recovery, but that's it.
>
> As an aside, I'd be interested to hear about mid-sized or larger OSS
> projects using Arch, and how successful they are. The only one I
> currently know about is Xouvert, which appears never to have gotten
> off the ground. (The gnuarch.org user-community page hasn't been
> responding today, or I might have more information there.)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 06:32:27PM -0300, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> Yes, it's intended to be public. OTOH, I'm not sure if it's interesting
> to anyone besides internal people and Linux distributions which want to
> use it as a reference. The page is still at
>
> https://moin.conectiva.com.br/RepositorySystem
Thanks. Actually I found it really interesting. It ended up
influencing me getting involved with Subversion.
--
Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Gustavo Niemeyer <ni...@conectiva.com>.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 03:52:30PM -0700, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 06:43:03PM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> > * Conectiva: I couldn't find much information about Conectiva due to
> > the language barrier, but they do have a glowing testimonial on
> > our propaganda page, have been using Subversion since August 2002,
> > and have a ginormous repository.
>
> They had a large wiki page about Subversion that was publically
> accessible and in English. It has since disappeared. I'm not sure this
> wiki was ever intended to be publically accessible. I was only able to
> access it via a deep link.
Yes, it's intended to be public. OTOH, I'm not sure if it's interesting
to anyone besides internal people and Linux distributions which want to
use it as a reference. The page is still at
https://moin.conectiva.com.br/RepositorySystem
--
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Subversion uptake in OSS projects
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 06:43:03PM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> * Conectiva: I couldn't find much information about Conectiva due to
> the language barrier, but they do have a glowing testimonial on
> our propaganda page, have been using Subversion since August 2002,
> and have a ginormous repository.
They had a large wiki page about Subversion that was publically
accessible and in English. It has since disappeared. I'm not sure this
wiki was ever intended to be publically accessible. I was only able to
access it via a deep link.
--
Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org