On Oct 20, 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote: > I'm very concerned that we're greating increasing the barrier to entry for > work on GCC. cvs is very intuitive and simple to use.
The same can be said of svn, so it's not like a great barrier increase. > I'm not seeing the same thing for svn/svk, but instead a series of > increasingly complex suggestions on how to do things efficiently. Make that *more* efficiently. AFAIK svn is much more efficient than cvs by default in all cases, except for disk space use. I suppose if you feel strongly about duplicate copies of files in your tree, there's always hardlink and similar solutions, which will then require more discipline from you in not accidentally modifying the -base files. Yes, that's yet another complex suggestion to make svn even more efficient, but you're not *required* to use any of them. > Saying "casual developers of GCC can use snapshots" is not something I think > we ought to be doing. Totally agreed. Fortunately, installing svn in such a way that it works fine by default is pretty easy, and that leaves room for additional efficiency improvements that might not even be possible with cvs. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
