[Dev] CVS to Subversion move plan

[Jared Rhine]

[Heikki == heikki at osafoundation.org on Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:33:19 -0700]

  Heikki> It seems like we should be able to migrate [to subversion]
  Heikki> in the beginning of May...

Are any specific methodologies planned to be changed?  Faster/better
branching support could perhaps enable some new approaches.  One that
occurred in passing is that a tag or branch could be used during
milestone builds to avoid locking the tree.  Also, tinderboxen could
build against tagged releases, similarly avoiding locking the tree
when a tinderbox goes red.  Longer term (with more server resources),
developers could work in branches with developer-specific tinderboxes,
and code could be reviewed during whenever code is promoted to the
trunk.

Not looking to debate merits of these ideas specifically (I think I
know what the arguments against would be), merely to stimulate
brainstorming.  Of course, a subversion switch is significant enough
that a "straight" migration (that is, preserving trunk/head-oriented
development) is probably healthier so only one concern at a time is
being addressed.

Is a "standard" trunk/branches/tags repository structure intended to
be used?

-- jared at wordzoo.com

"One cannot mark the point without marking the path."