| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] CVS should die |
| Date: | 2004-11-05 20:37:54 |
| Message-ID: | 11687.1099687074@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Aha, glad I'm not the only one. Version 1.1 has a flat-file based
> backend which is not prone to BDB-permission-related problems, see:
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook-1.1/ch05.html#svn-ch-5-sect-1.4 .
> It's only been around a few months though and the docs mention
> possible issues with scalability.
One of the reasons I'm disinclined to move is that none of the proposed
alternatives seem especially, um, mature. AFAIK this project has never
had CVS lose any data in the eight years we've used it. I'd want a
comparable level of trust in any replacement SCM, and I haven't got it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2004-11-05 20:40:59 | Re: [PATCHES] CVS should die |
| Previous Message | Travis P | 2004-11-05 20:19:51 | Re: [PATCHES] CVS should die |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-11-05 21:31:14 | Re: GiST: memory allocation, cleanup |
| Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2004-11-05 19:38:51 | Re: [PATCHES] CVS should die |