[Ecls-list] cvs and git [was editline poll]

[Matthew Mondor]

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 23:34:28 -0500
dherring at tentpost.com wrote:

> I have also wondered whether people still pull
> from CVS, and why.

I don't have authority to speak for the ECL project, yet I might be
able to express my opinion as one of the people tracking CVS:

Most probably habit and lack of necessity/time to learn every new VCS
with hype :) (really, every project has their favorite these days, but
if they also support CVS as well, there's at least a common ground).

Also there seems to be some problems which are not easily resolved with
GIT alone such as refering to a specific version of a particular file
(i.e. along with ident(1) without needing to resort to a hash which is
actually also that of a whole state, and is time/sequence unrelated).

People used to CVS also commonly import/merge/maintain
third party software using vendor branches with ease, and mirror
repositories with cvsup, and they're used to the simple CVS on-disk
format, might even use homebrewed software which operates with it
observing its locking protocol, so it's not obvious to convince them to
switch to another VCS unless there's a sudden need to rename/reorganize
a large number of files around on a steady basis.

This might explain why some think that it's useful to also have a CVS
backing respository for a project...  That said, if ECL was to
eventually only be available via release tarballs and GIT, I'd probably
still track it, as I very much like it.
-- 
Matt