move to bitkeeper?

[Stefan Reinauer]

* ron minnich <rminnich at lanl.gov> [030630 17:22]:
> sourceforge is really having trouble nowadays. Half my browsers think the 
> web pages are to be downloaded for some reason; cvs updates are seeing 
> 24-hour delays; and random outages are a daily occurence. 

Worst I saw was about a week of delay on the freebios2 tree.

> Any comments or objections to me at least looking into a move to 
> bitkeeper.com? It has lots of advantages, not the least that it supports 
> distributed repositories. 
> 
> Anyone have anything to say about this, pro or con?

There are quite some versioning systems that could be used instead of
CVS. I've been testing tla (Tom Lords Arch) for the openbios core i am
developing. It's relatively new, but promising (knows transactions,
renaming and deletion of files and directories etc)
Aegis otoh sets up on cvs (iirc) and gives additional checkin security
(4 eyes principle for checkins to the stable tree, automatic testsuites
and others)
subversion (svn) is probably the closest to cvs when it comes down to
usage (most cvs commands are available in svn, so developers don't have
to recalibrate on the new system).

Another thing is moving the source tree away from Sourceforge. In that
regard it'd be possible that we move the tree to the openbios cvs server
as well. It was very reliable up to now and the people administrating it 
are willing to help open source firmware projects. Moving to a
versioning system other than CVS should not be a problem.

  Stefan

-- 
Architecture Team
    SuSE Linux AG